1 


LIBRARY 

UNIVKRSITY  OP 

C.vL.FORNIA 

SAN  DIEGO 


THE  UNIVERSITY  UBRWtf 

ONIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  SAN  Of  ISO 

LA  JOLLA.  CALIFORNIA 


Columbia  flftmbergftp 
STUDIES  IN  CLASSICAL  PHILOLOGY 


A  STUDY  OF  ARCHAISM  IN  EURIPIDES 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 
SALES  AGENT 

NEW  YORK: 

LEMCKE  &  BUECHNER 
30-32  WEST  2?TH  STREET 

LONDON: 
HENRY  FROWDE 

AMEN  CORNER,  E.  C. 


A  STUDY  OF  ARCHAISM  IN 
EURIPIDES 


BY 


' 


CLARENCE   AUGUSTUS   MANNING,   PH.D. 


gotk 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 
1916 

All  rights  reserved 


Copyright,  1916 
BY  COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 


Printed  from  type,   May,   1916 


This  monograph  has  been  approved  by  the  Department  of 
Classical  Philology  of  Columbia  University  as  a  contribution  to 

knowledge  worthy  of  publication. 

CLARENCE  H.  YOUNG 

Chairman 


TO 

THE  PROFESSORS 

OP  THE 

DEPARTMENT  OF  CLASSICAL  PHILOLOGY 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

INTRODUCTION xi 

I.  THE  STRUCTURE  OF  THE  DRAMA 1 

II.  THE  PROLOGUES  AND  EPILOGUES  OP  EURIPIDES  27 

III.  THE  PARODOS 31 

1.  THE  STRUCTURE  OF  THE  PARODOS  ...  31 

2.  THE  CAUSE  OF  THE  ENTRANCE  OF  THE 

CHORUS 41 

IV.  THE  IAMBIC  SPEECHES  OF  THE  CHORUS  ...  44 
V.  THE  ANAPAEST 51 

VI.  THE  TROCHAIC  TETRAMETER 56 

VII.  DESCRIPTION 64 

VIII.  DREAMS .  68 

IX.  THE  RELIGION  OF  EURIPIDES .  73 

1.  DIONYSUS 74 

2.  APOLLO 83 

3.  ATHENA 92 

BIBLIOGRAPHY  .  97 


INTRODUCTION 

IN  discussing  the  archaism  of  Euripides,  I  may  seem  to  be 
selecting  for  emphasis  a  peculiar  aspect  of  a  poet  who  appears 
on  the  whole  to  represent  an  advanced  point  of  view.  Yet,  as  is 
often  the  case,  the  radical  may  propose  ideas  which  have  already 
been  discarded  by  his  contemporaries,  and  the  sudden  revelation 
of  these  may  cause  them  to  seem  far-sighted  prophecies  of  the 
future.  So  with  Euripides.  Although  a  sceptic  and  a  critic  of  the 
Greek  state  as  he  knew  it,  and  the  victim  of  the  conservative 
Aristophanes,  yet  it  was  he,  and  not  Sophocles,  who  was  often 
the  conserver  and  the  restorer  of  the  old. 

Stalwart  champion  of  the  past  as  Euripides  was,  in  many 
cases  he  was  unable  or  unwilling  to  restore  tragedy  to  its  pris- 
tine shape,  and  to  remove  it  further  from  the  works  of  Sophocles 
and  the  lesser  poets  who  so  often  defeated  him.  Euripides'  plays 
always  reveal  their  true  position  in  the  history  of  tragedy.  The 
poet  shows  the  influence  of  Sophocles;  he  yields  to  the  prejudices 
of  his  age.  So  we  need  not  be  surprised  if  in  the  course  of  our 
examination  of  his  archaisms,  we  find  gaps,  inconsistencies,  and 
at  times  a  lack  of  archaism  in  passages  when  we  might  reason- 
ably expect  to  see  clear  examples  of  it. 

I  shall  here  consider  some  of  the  ways  in  which  Euripides,  the 
man  of  curious  and  ironic  history,  as  Professor  Murray  terms 
him,  set  himself  to  restore  and  revivify  old  forms  of  tragedy 
and  older  usages,  and  in  which  he  carried  on  the  tradition  of 
Aeschylus,  the  poet  with  whom  Aristophanes  unfavorably  com- 
pared him  in  the  Frogs.  Strange  as  it  may  seem  to  consider 
the  sceptic  and  recluse,  the  innovator  and  reformer,  as  the  suc- 
cessor of  the  warrior  of  Marathon,  we  shall  find  it  true  that  in 
many  ways  Euripides  undertook  successfully  to  revive  and 
adapt  the  methods  of  Aeschylus,  and  that  we  can  understand 
better  many  of  the  peculiarities  of  his  dramatic  technique,  if 
we  consider  them  from  this  point  of  view. 


A   STUDY    OF    ARCHAISM   IN 
EURIPIDES 

CHAPTER  I 

THE   STRUCTURE   OF   THE   DRAMA 

ONE  of  the  most  interesting  aspects  of  Euripides'  dramatic 
character  is  revealed  by  a  study  of  his  way  of  handling  his 
subjects.  The  lack  of  unity  in  many  of  his  plays  is  well  known, 
and  even  in  those  of  more  unified  type  scenes  often  seem  to  be 
inserted  in  defiance  of  the  rules  of  dramatic  art. 

Admirers  of  Euripides  have  attempted  in  many  ways  to 
excuse  or  deny  these  apparent  faults.  Prof.  Verrall,  in  Euripi- 
des the  Rationalist  and  in  Four  Plays  of  Euripides,  tries  to  es- 
cape them  by  supposing  the  dramas  to  have  one  meaning  to 
the  general  public  and  another  to  the  educated,  sceptical  classes. 
It  is  remarkable  that  Aristophanes  did  not  betray  the  secret, 
if  this  were  so.  Euripides'  critics  have  regarded  the  lack  of 
unity  as  an  evidence  of  careless  workmanship  and  have  used  it 
to  make  unfavorable  comparisons  between  him  and  Sophocles. 
As  Aristophanes  does  not  mention  this  defect,  it  may  be  well 
to  consider  whether  it  exists.  Where  it  does,  I  think  that  it 
is  to  be  explained  as  due  to  a  tendency  to  follow  the  methods  of 
Aeschylus. 

Aristotle,  in  the  Poetics,  discusses  tragedy  and  epic  poetry 

as  if  they  were  closely  related  forms  of  art,  but  he  adds  that 

tragedy  contains  elements  which  are  not  found  in  epic  poetry.1 

He  states  that  the  action  of  a  play,  unlike  that  of  an  epic, 

1  P.  1449  b  18  ff. 


Z  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

should  be  contained  within  one  revolution  of  the  sun:  /cai 
Toi)T(j)  6ta0€pet,  KCUTOI  TO  irputrov  6/xoicos  tv  rats  TpaycpBicus  TOVTO 
tiroiovv  Kai  ev  rots  eir&riv.1  M.  Croiset2  thinks  that  the  tetralogy 
was  formed  by  the  division  of  the  chorus  into  sections  which 
appeared  separately  at  different  stages  in  the  course  of  the 
dithyramb.  Such  an  origin  of  the  tetralogy  is  very  probable, 
whatever  theory  we  adopt  as  to  the  source  of  tragedy. 

Among  the  extant  dramas  of  Aeschylus,  there  is  preserved 
one  trilogy,  the  Oresteia.  The  satyric  drama  connected  with 
it  has  perished,  but  as  it  need  not  have  been  closely  connected 
by  subject,  it  is  relatively  unimportant  for  our  present  purpose. 
At  times,  Aeschylus  appears  to  have  used  tetralogies  in  which 
all  the  plays  were  independent.  The  Persae  is  probably  an 
example  of  such  a  play. 

In  the  Oresteia,  there  is  but  one  theme  —  the  vengeance  of 
Orestes  on  his  mother  for  her  murder  of  Agamemnon  and  his 
acquittal  in  a  trial  at  Athens.  Similarly  the  individual  plays 
possess  unity.  The  Agamemnon  shows  the  murder  of  Agamem- 
non; the  Choephori,  the  vengeance  of  Orestes;  the  Eumenides, 
the  trial  and  justification  of  the  matricide.  Let  us  now  notice 
a  few  points  in  the  composition  of  the  three  plays. 

In  the  Agamemnon,  the  description  of  the  beacon-fire  and  the 
early  choral  odes  3  give  the  atmosphere.  The  infidelity  of  the 
queen  overshadows  the  joy  because  of  the  capture  of  Troy. 
The  old  watchman  says: 


yevoiro  8'  ovv 

O.VO.KTOS  O'LKCOV  rrjde  jSaardcrat 

TO.  d'   aXXa  ov/co'  /SoOs  eiri  7\aj(rcr27 

OLKOS  5'ayros,  et  4>8oyy?ii>  Xa/Sot, 
av  \t&(.tv  ws  enwv  eya> 

av&u  KOV  paBovai  X^do/iai.4 

1  P.  1449  b  14  f  . 

2  De  la  tetralogie  dans  I'histoire  de  la  tragedie  grecque,  Revue  des  Etudes 
grecques,  Vol.  I,  p.  373  ff.  «  1-487.  4  34-39. 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF   THE   DRAMA  3 

This  watchman  was  apparently  traditional  in  the  story  of  the 
house  of  Atreus.  In  Odyssey  IV,  524  ff.,  a  servant  of  Aegisthus 
watches  a  year  for  the  king's  return.  Prof.  Verrall 1  supposes 
that  the  old  man  is  loyal  to  Agamemnon  but  that  Aegisthus 
sends  the  beacon-fire  as  a  signal  to  the  queen.  The  neglect  of 
time  involved  in  the  usual  interpretation  does  not  seem  so  diffi- 
cult as  Prof.  Verrall  thought,  since  the  Persae  and  Trachiniae 
offer  as  striking  cases.2  The  storm  3  also  has  an  Homeric  source. 
In  Odyssey  III,  286  ff.,  Nestor  tells  how  a  storm  drove  Menelaus 
to  Egypt  and  in  this  way  gave  Aegisthus  an  opportunity  to 
kill  Agamemnon  alone.  It  is  important  to  remember  that  in 
the  play  it  is  the  chorus  and  not  Clytaemestra  who  inquires 
for  Menelaus.  In  40-257,  the  chorus  describes  the  main  events 
preceding  the  action  of  the  play,  especially  the  sacrifice  of 
Iphigenia,  the  ostensible  cause  of  Clytaemestra's  hatred  of  her 
husband.  The  same  recital  is  in  a  way  continued  in  355-487, 
an  ode  in  which  the  chorus  pictures  the  fallen  city  and  the 
sorrows  of  victor  and  vanquished.  In  1-781,  then,  the  condi- 
tion of  Argos  and  Agamemnon  is  portrayed,  while  the  rumble 
of  the  coming  storm  sounds  ever  nearer.  With  matchless  unity, 
every  thing  conspires  to  place  the  king  helpless  in  the  hands 
of  his  wife,  his  bitter  foe.  Since  the  scenes  following  the  murder 
show  the  resolute  character  of  the  queen,  the  unity  of  the  play 
is  unbroken. 

In  the  Choephori,  the  long  threnos  and  the  invocation  of 
Agamemnon4  are  dramatic  in  the  same  sense  as  the  opening 
scene  of  the  Supplices.  The  divine  powers  are  gained  as  helpers.5 
When  the  powerful  spirit  of  the  murdered  king  has  been  gained 
as  a  friend,  the  most  important  part  of  the  struggle  is  over.  As 
the  recognition  of  Orestes  and  Electra  is  only  an  episode  in 

1  Agamemnon,  p.  xxxix. 

1  Cf.  Prof.  Dyer,  The  Plot  of  the  Agamemnon,  Harvard  Studies,  Vol. 
VII,  p.  95  ff.  »  489-680.  *  306-513. 

'  Sheppard,  The  First  Scene  of  the  Suppliants  of  Aeschylus,  Classical 
Quarterly,  Vol.  V,  p.  220  ff. 


4  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

the  vengeance,  it  is  accomplished  by  245,  whereas  in  the  Electro, 
of  Sophocles  it  extends  to  1231,  and  in  the  Electro,  of  Euripides 
to  584.  The  motif  of  the  vengeance  so  dominates  the  play  that 
the  unity  of  it  is  strongly  marked. 

In  the  Eumenides,  the  opening  scene  1  is  laid  at  Delphi.  Since 
in  the  Choephori  Orestes  acts  by  order  of  Apollo,2  it  is  fitting 
that  in  his  misery  he  should  return  to  Delphi  to  the  temple  of 
the  god.  By  this  scene,  too,  the  coming  of  Apollo  to  Athens 
for  the  trial  is  prepared.  An  effective  scene  —  the  one  mortal 
surrounded  by  the  dread  Erinyes  and  aided  only  by  Phoebus  — 
it  serves  as  a  bond  of  union  with  the  Choephori.  Finally  the 
importance  of  Orestes  in  the  play  is  so  skilfully  treated  and 
diminished  that  we  do  not  miss  his  absence  at  the  end. 

The  scene  at  Delphi  is  only  one  of  the  connecting  links  of 
the  trilogy.  Thus  in  Ag.  1279-1285,  Cassandra  prophesies  the 
coming  of  the  avenger.  In  1646-1648  and  1667,  the  chorus 
foretells  to  Aegisthus  the  return  of  Orestes.  At  the  opening  of 
the  Choephori,  the  predictions  have  been  fulfilled  and  the 
avenger  is  at  his  father's  tomb.  The  threnos  recalls  the  murder 
of  Agamemnon.  As  the  queen  enticed  her  husband  into  the 
palace,  so  Orestes  drives  her  within.3  The  Furies,  promised 
by  Clytaemestra  in  924,  appear  at  1048  and  drive  Orestes 
away.  The  Eumenides  shows  the  flight  of  the  matricide.  The 
appearance  of  the  ghost  of  Clytaemestra  4  reminds  us  of  her 
fate.  The  trial  of  Orestes  reviews  the  whole  story,  and  then 
the  play  gradually  turns  to  the  relations  of  the  old  and  new 
divinities. 

The  Oresteia  is  really  a  drama  in  three  acts  extending  over 
many  years.  Each  of  the  component  parts  possesses  unity 
and  the  three  are  connected  by  many  interwoven  strands. 
The  trilogy  is  not  only  dramatic  but  also  epic  and  lyric  in  struc- 
ture. Unfortunately  the  loss  of  the  Oresteia  of  Stesichorus  and 
other  such  lyric  epics  prevents  us  from  analyzing  the  relation 

1  1-234.         2  Cf.  Ch.  269-273,  900-902.          3  892-934.         «  94-139. 


THE   STRUCTURE    OF   THE   DRAMA  5 

of  Aeschylus  to  his  sources.  The  foregoing  remarks  may  serve 
to  indicate  the  method  in  which  Aeschylus  treated  the  trilogy- 
form. 

The  Supplices,  the  earliest  of  the  extant  plays,  was  probably 
the  first  play  of  a  trilogy.  The  account  of  the  voyage  of  the 
daughters  of  Danaus  from  Egypt  *  and  the  emphasis  laid  on 
their  relationship  to  Argos  through  lo  would  suggest  this.  Prof. 
Tucker 2  remarks  that  if  this  were  the  second  play  of  a  trilogy 
picturing  the  whole  story  of  the  maidens,  the  third  play  would 
contain  a  disproportionate  amount  of  material.  In  the  lost 
dramas  (perhaps  the  Aegyptii  and  the  Danaides),  were  told 
probably  the  murder  of  the  sons  of  Aegyptus  on  their  wedding 
night  and  the  trial  of  Hypermnestra  for  failure  to  slay  her  hus- 
band and  her  acquittal  through  the  intercession  of  Aphrodite. 
In  the  Supplices,  the  lyric  elements  overshadow  in  extent  and 
importance  those  which  are  purely  dramatic.  The  play  might 
be  called  The  Reception  of  the  Suppliants,  since  the  remaining 
action  serves  only  to  indicate  the  intention  of  the  Argives  to 
respect  their  promise.  Because  of  the  loss  of  the  other  plays, 
we  cannot  discuss  the  structure  of  the  trilogy.  Still  in  1018- 
1073,  the  division  in  the  chorus  over  the  reverence  due  to 
Aphrodite  would  prepare  for  the  second  play.  The  appear- 
ance of  Aphrodite  in  the  Danaides  probably  was  similar  to  that 
of  Apollo  in  the  Eumenides. 

From  the  Hypothesis  of  the  Septem  contra  Thebas  we  learn 
that  it  was  the  third  play  of  the  trilogy,  Laius,  Oedipus,  Septem. 
As  the  trial  scene  in  the  Eumenides  reviewed  in  a  way  the  sub- 
ject of  the  trilogy,  so  here  the  choral  ode  720-791  summarizes 
the  fate  of  the  Labdacidae,  the  theme  of  this  group  of  plays. 
As  Mr.  Sheppard 3  notes,  the  drama  falls  into  three  divisions, 
in  each  of  which  the  situation  is  created  by  a  messenger.  In 
1-368,  Eteocles  calms  the  women;  in  369-791,  he  chooses  the 
champions  and  leaves  to  meet  Polynices;  finally  in  792-1084, 
1  1-18.  *  Supplicesj  p.  xxiv.  3  Greek  Tragedy,  p.  57. 


6  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

the  death  of  the  brothers  is  bewailed  and  Antigone  with  part 
of  the  chorus  insists  on  burying  Polynices.  The  conclusion  is 
often  attacked  because  Antigone's  defiance  of  the  edict  seems 
an  unsatisfactory  close.  Still  the  division  of  the  chorus  was 
undoubtedly  very  effective.  Similar  is  the  ending  of  Euripides' 
Cyclops  where  the  blinded  giant  says: 


oi>  STJT',  cTret  <re  rijaB'  droppi^as  Trerpas 
avroiffi  avvva.VTO.uji  (rvvrptyu 


The  epic  tradition,  if  fully  known,  might  explain  the  end  of  the 
Septem  as  well  as  it  does  that  of  the  Cyclops.  In  spite  of  the 
divisions  in  the  play,  there  is  a  real  unity,  since  the  two  themes, 
the  saving  of  Thebes  and  the  fate  of  the  brothers,  are  closely 
connected  and  even  fused  together. 

According  to  the  probable  view  of  Wecklein-Allen,2  the 
Prometheus  Vinctus  was  the  first  play  of  the  trilogy  Prometheus 
Bound  (Aeo-yuwTTjs)  ,  Unbound  (AUOMCTOS),  Firebringer  (IIup</>6pos). 
The  same  editors  think  that  the  third  play  showed  the  founda- 
tion of  the  IIpojui70€ia,  as  the  Eumenides  did  that  of  the  Are- 
opagus. The  Prometheus  Vinctus  has  unity,  especially  when 
we  consider  it  as  part  of  the  trilogy.  The  episode  of  lo  pre- 
pares for  the  second  play,  for  it  is  her  descendant  Heracles  who 
is  to  free  Prometheus  (771-774).  Frag.  199  3  shows  something 
of  Heracles'  importance  in  the  Solutus.  The  oracle  concerning 
Zeus'  marriage  would  be  prominent  in  the  other  plays.  It 
seems  certain  then  that  this  trilogy  also  possessed  unity  of  theme 
and  unity  of  action  in  individual  plays. 

Among  the  extant  plays  of  Aeschylus,  the  Persae  is  the 
only  one  which  seems  not  to  be  part  of  a  connected  trilogy 
and  it  is  the  only  extant  non-mythological  Greek  tragedy. 
The  Hypothesis  states  that  Aeschylus  competed  with  the 
Phineus,  Persae,  Glaucus  Potnieus,  and  Prometheus.  We  do 

1  704-705.  *  Prometheus,  p.  19  ff.  3  Nauck1. 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF  THE   DRAMA  7 

not  need  to  follow  Wilamowitz 1  in  assuming  that  this  in- 
formation is  wrong,  and  that  the  Persae  was  first  produced  in 
Sicily  and  is  a  trilogy  in  structure.  In  spite  of  the  lyric  character 
of  the  play  and  the  small  amount  of  action,  yet  because  of  its 
glorification  of  Athens  it  was  undoubtedly  a  very  effective  play 
in  that  city.  The  evocation  of  Darius  and  the  advice  which  he 
gives 2  does  not  destroy  the  unity  of  the  plot,  since  it  is  intro- 
duced to  contrast  the  might  of  Darius  with  the  humiliation  of 
Xerxes  as  seen  in  909-1076.  The  procession  in  the  exodos  may 
be  compared  with  those  in  the  Septem  and  the  Eumenides  and 
contrasted  with  that  in  the  Supplices,  where  the  opposing  songs 
of  the  semichoruses  prepare  for  the  next  play. 

Aeschylus,  then,  in  using  the  trilogy,  apparently  constructed 
a  kind  of  epic  drama  or,  as  Welcker 3  described  it,  an  epic  in 
which  the  important  moments  were  acted.  There  was  often, 
perhaps  usually,  unity  in  the  trilogy  and  also  in  the  individual 
plays.  Some  seem  episodic,  but  we  should  probably  not  have 
this  impression,  if  we  could  see  the  manner  in  which  the  part 
was  related  to  the  whole. 

The  plays  of  Sophocles,  since  he  treated  the  individual  drama 
and  not  the  trilogy  as  the  real  unit,  are  of  course  very  differ- 
ent. For  the  same  reason,  his  method  of  obtaining  unity  is 
not  the  same  as  that  of  Aeschylus. 

We  commence  with  perhaps  the  earliest  extant  tragedy  of 
Sophocles,  the  Antigone.4  At  988,  with  the  entrance  of  Tiresias, 
the  way  is  opened  for  Creon  to  suffer  for  his  treatment  of  An- 
tigone. We  cannot  compare  the  punishment  of  Creon  with 
the  vengeance  on  Clytaemestra  in  the  Choephori,  since  no  aven- 
gers appear  and  the  outcome  is  determined  by  the  previous 
deeds  of  the  characters.  Antigone  is  punished,  because  she 
disobeys  the  edict  of  Creon  which  is  mentioned  in  1-99  and 

1  Die  Parser  des  Aischylos,  Hermes,  Vol.  XXXII,  p.  382  ff. 

«  623-908. 

1  Aeschylische  Trilogie  Prometheus,  p.  486.  4  Jebb,  Ajax,  p.  liii  f . 


8  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

reaffirmed  by  the  ruler  in  192-206,  and  the  impious  character 
of  the  same  edict  causes  divine  punishment  to  strike  Creon 
through  the  deaths  of  his  son,  Haemon,  betrothed  to  Antigone, 
and  of  his  wife,  Eurydice.  In  extent  the  subject  is  of  about 
the  same  magnitude  as  that  of  a  play  of  Aeschylus,  but  the 
treatment  is  very  different.  In  structure  it  is  nearer  to  our 
conception  of  a  drama  than  is  any  work  of  Aeschylus,  but  it 
is  not  therefore  more  powerful.  Perhaps  the  greatest  change 
made  by  Sophocles  is  in  the  delineation  of  character.  Antigone 
stands  forth  very  prominently,  and  her  greatness  is  made  more 
evident  by  the  contrast  with  the  timid  Ismene.  Creon,  too, 
is  developed  as  a  powerful  antagonist  for  Antigone.  In  this 
drama  more  than  in  any  other  of  Sophocles  now  extant,  the 
actors  in  a  way  represent  certain  ideas,  a  tendency  almost 
wholly  lacking  in  the  later  plays. 

The  Ajax  is  of  nearly  the  same  date.  The  second  play  of  the 
Aeschylean  trilogy,  "Oir\uv  Kptons,  0pfj<ro-<u,  SaXa/uweu,  showed 
(or  rather  told  of)  the  suicide  of  Ajax,  and  the 
probably  concluded  with  the  establishment  of  the 
As  the  burial  of  Ajax  was  an  important  part  of  the  story,  Sopho- 
cles was  bound  to  use  it,2  but  he  prepares  for  the  dispute  by 
829-830,  where  Ajax  prays  that  Teucer  may  prevent  the  dis- 
honoring of  his  body.  The  importance  of  burial  to  a  Greek 
explains  the  death  of  the  protagonist  in  the  middle  of  the 
play,  especially  when  the  play  shows  the  making  of  a  hero. 
The  appearance  of  Odysseus  at  the  beginning  and  the  end  also 
serves  to  produce  unity.  We  cannot  arbitrarily  divide  the  play 
without  doing  violence  to  the  author's  intentions.  Still  the 
character  of  Ajax  is  so  excellently  drawn  that  to  us,  if  not  to 
the  ancients,  his  death  makes  a  strong  point  of  division  in  the 
action  of  the  tragedy. 

The  Trachiniae  again  apparently  lacks  unity,  but  only  ap- 
parently.    The  real  theme  is  the  death  of  Heracles,  whose 
1  Jebb,  Ajax,  p.  xix  ff.         *  Sheppard,  Greek  Tragedy,  p.  102  ff. 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF   THE   DRAMA 

character  dominates  the  plot  of  the  play  even  long  before  he 
appears.  Deianira,  however,  is  so  charmingly  drawn  that  she 
seems  to  be  the  important  figure,  and  we  are  led  by  our  sym- 
pathies (perhaps  more  than  the  Greeks  were)  to  feel  that  her 
death  destroys  the  unity  instead  of  being  only  an  incident  in 
the  main  story. 

In  the  Electra,  Sophocles  again  shifts  the  interest  in  the  course 
of  the  action.  He  has  followed  the  tradition  of  Aeschylus, 
save  that  Clytaemestra  is  slain  first  and  that  there  are  no  Furies 
to  torment  Orestes.  The  recognition  of  brother  and  sister  is 
not  completed  until  1231.  Electra  herself  is  more  important 
and  much  more  strongly  emphasized  than  in  the  Choephori. 
To  obtain  this  result  while  still  keeping  Orestes  as  the  real 
avenger,  Sophocles  has  been  led  to  obscure  the  formal  unity, 
a  loss  well  counterbalanced  by  the  gain  in  the  character  of 
Electra. 

If,  in  the  Electra,  the  emphasis  is  not  laid  upon  the  traditional 
hero  until  the  play  is  far  advanced,  in  the  Philoctetes  it  is  laid 
upon  a  subordinate  character  practically  throughout.  It  is 
Neoptolemus,  apparently  first  introduced  by  Sophocles,1  in 
whom  we  are  chiefly  interested,  and  the  traditional  solution  is 
gained  by  the  use  of  the  deus  ex  machina.  Probably  in  the 
Philoctetes  of  Aeschylus,  Philoctetes  himself  was  the  character 
emphasized. 

In  the  Oedipus  Rex,  there  is  no  shift  of  sympathy.  Oedipus 
holds  the  centre  of  the  stage  from  the  time  when  he  enters  as 
the  kind  ruler  until  his  final  exit,  a  broken,  blinded  man.  With 
matchless  unity,  the  action  moves  on  majestically  and  irre- 
sistibly. 

We  may  here  briefly  mention  the  Ichneutae,  a  satyric  drama 

of  which  a  large  part  has  recently  been  discovered.    The  theme 

is  the  theft  of  Apollo's  cattle  and  the  invention  of  the  lyre  by 

the  infant  Hermes.     The  conclusion  is  not  preserved,  but  I 

1  Jebb.  Philoctetes,  p.  xxii. 


10  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

think  it  almost  certain  that  Hermes  appeared  at  the  end  and 
at  once  overshadowed  Apollo,  who  is  prominent  in  the  part 
preserved.  The  play  is  apparently  formed  much  as  Sophocles' 
tragedies  are. 

This  brief  survey  will  show  us  some  of  the  cardinal  principles 
of  Sophocles'  art.  His  dramas  contain  one  action  and  accord- 
ingly possess  unity,  as  do  the  plays  of  Aeschylus.  Yet  this  is 
obscured  at  times  by  the  elaboration  of  subordinate  charac- 
ters to  such  an  extent  that  the  dramas  seem  to  fall  into  distinct 
sections  and  the  impression  of  unity  is  materially  weakened. 
Sophocles  is  primarily  a  delineator  of  character.  His  art  pro- 
duces the  Oedipus  Rex,  where  the  interest  never  shifts,  but  the 
weaknesses  of  it  are  seen  in  the  Trachiniae,  where  there  is  a  de- 
cided shift  in  emphasis.  The  reappearance  in  many  plays, 
towards  the  end,  of  a  character  who  had  appeared  in  the  be- 
ginning *  tends  to  emphasize  the  unity  and  at  the  same  time  to 
dissipate  any  resemblance  in  movement  to  that  of  an  epic. 
As  a  result,  Sophocles'  dramas  seem  of  a  more  modern  form 
than  those  of  Aeschylus. 

The  Oedipus  Coloneus  represents  a  very  different  type.  It 
falls  into  three  divisions:  (1)  1-323,  549-719,  the  reception  of 
Oedipus  at  Colonus;  (2)  324-548,  720-1455,  the  attempts  to 
remove  him  from  the  protection  of  Athens;  (3)  1456-1779, 
the  passing  of  Oedipus.  The  portion  720-1455  again  is  in  two 
parts:  720-1149,  the  attempt  of  Creon  in  behalf  of  Eteocles 
by  force;  and  1150-1455,  the  attempt  of  Polynices  by  per- 
suasion. Prof.  Murray  2  breaks  the  symmetry  of  the  piece  by 
not  classing  as  parallel  the  two  attempts.  It  will  be  remembered 
that  Aeschylus  made  the  reception  of  suppliants  the  theme 
of  the  first  play  of  a  trilogy.  The  third  division 3  is  rather  simi- 
lar to  the  Eumenides,  since  it  represents  the  final  settlement  of 

1  Cf .  Platt,  The  Burial  of  Ajax,  Classical  Review,  Vol.  XXV,  p.  102. 

2  Ritual  Forms  in  Greek  Tragedy,  Excursus  in  Miss  Harrison's  Themis, 
p.  358.  *  1456-1779. 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF  THE   DRAMA  11 

the  action  under  divine  influence.  The  drama  is  in  a  sense  a 
kind  of  trilogy,  since  it  possesses  unity  but  has  three  distinct 
parts  with  separate  actions.  The  insertion  of  the  arrival  of 
Ismene  before  that  of  Theseus  l  causes  interlocked  order  of  the 
first  and  second  sections  and  in  this  way  the  obscuring  of  the 
formal  divisions  increases  the  general  effect  of  unity.  The 
bipartite  division  of  the  second  part,  and  the  position  of 
1456  which  is  within  the  strophe  1447-1456  and  connects  the 
second  and  the  third  divisions,  tend  also  to  increase  the  im- 
pression of  unity.  We  may  say  briefly  that  the  structure  seems 
epic,  as  there  is  a  succession  of  important  points  in  the  piece 
instead  of  one  climax  with  all  details  subordinated. 

If  ancient  tradition  is  correct,  as  is  likely,  in  assigning  this 
play  to  the  old  age  of  Sophocles,  the  poet  followed  a  style  of 
tragedy  which  Euripides  had  used  long  before.  To  the  works 
of  the  third  of  the  poets  we  now  come. 

We  will  first  analyze  the  Hippolytus,  a  play  produced  in 
428  B.C.  This  is  commonly  considered  one  of  Euripides'  mas- 
terpieces, and  it  shows  very  well  his  methods  of  composition. 
The  following  scheme  will  show  the  structure. 

1-    57  Aphrodite    announces   that   she  will  punish  Hip- 
polytus for  his  neglect  of  her. 
58-    87   Hippolytus  praises  and  crowns  Artemis. 
88-  113  Despite  the  advice  of  a  servant,  he  will  not  notice 

Aphrodite. 

114-  120  The  servant  prays  to  Aphrodite. 
121-  169  The  chorus  of  women  speculates  as  to  the  cause  of 

Phaedra's  illness. 

170-  372  Phaedra  betrays  her  passion  for  Hippolytus. 
373-  524  The  nurse  advises  Phaedra  to  gratify  it. 
525-  564  The  chorus  praises  Eros. 
565-  668  Hippolytus  refuses  the  nurse's  proposals. 
669-  731    Phaedra  reproaches  the  nurse. 

1  324-719. 


12  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

732-  775  The  chorus  prays  for  peace  and  quiet. 

776-  789  The  nurse  tells  of  Phaedra's  suicide. 

790-  810  Theseus  learns  of  it. 

811-  855  Theseus  and  the  chorus  lament  for  Phaedra. 

856-  898  Theseus  finds  the  letter  incriminating  Hippolytus 
and  curses  him. 

899-1101   He  accuses  Hippolytus  and  exiles  him.     Because 

of  his  oath,  Hippolytus  is  silent. 
1102-1150  The  chorus  laments  for  Hippolytus. 
1151-1267  A  messenger  reports  the  mishap  to  Hippolytus. 
1268-1281   The  chorus  sings  the  praise  of  Aphrodite. 
1282-1466  Artemis  reveals  the  truth.    Hippolytus  is  carried  in, 

pardons  his  father,  and  dies. 

In  this  play,  the  portion  1-120  is  clearly  marked  off  and  shows 
the  offence  of  Hippolytus.  Unless  we  accept  Prof.  Murray's 
ascription  of  1102-1110  and  1120-1130  to  the  chorus  of  hunts- 
men, the  separate  chorus  of  this  first  section  does  not  reap- 
pear. There  is  another  break  after  855.  In  121-855,  the 
subject  is  the  fate  of  Phaedra.  In  her  last  words  she  hints 
that  she  will  do  mischief.  Cf  .  728-731  : 


drop  K.O.KOV  ye 

davovcr',  tv'  eidfj  /ii)  'irl  rots  e/wus 
11^77X65  elvai'  rijs  vovov  8e  rfjffde  juot 
/j,6Ta.(rx.<j)v 


The  final  section  sets  forth  the  fate  of  Hippolytus  and  contains 
the  appearance  of  Artemis,  which  balances  that  of  Aphrodite 
in  the  prologue. 

These  three  sections  of  the  Hippolytus  are  almost  as  inde- 
pendent as  the  plays  of  an  Aeschylean  trilogy,  although  the 
choral  portions  are  shorter  and  of  less  importance  than  in  the 
plays  of  Aeschylus.  On  the  other  hand,  the  feud  between 
Aphrodite  and  Artemis  furnishes  a  unifying  influence,  and  the 
appearance  of  the  goddesses,  one  in  the  prologue,  the  other  in 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF  THE   DRAMA  13 

the  exodos,  increases  and  emphasizes  it.  Structurally  the  play 
is  nearer  in  form  to  the  Oedipus  Coloneus  than  to  either  the 
Oedipus  Rex  or  the  Antigone.  I  will  not  say  that  Euripides 
conceived  it  as  a  trilogy,  but  he  at  least  chose  an  epic  type  of 
drama  as  a  model. 

The  Heraclidae,  a  play  of  about  the  same  date,  has  a  similar 
structure.  In  1-380,  lolaos  and  the  children  of  Heracles  are 
received  by  Demophon  and  protected  against  Eurystheus. 
The  action,  a  reception  of  suppliants  and  the  failure  of  a  herald's 
attempt  to  remove  them,  is  substantially  that  of  the  Supplices 
of  Aeschylus.  Still  the  play  of  Euripides  shows  more  honor 
to  Athens  than  that  of  Aeschylus  to  Argos,  since  in  the 
Heraclidae  the  suppliants  have  not  been  formally  received  by 
Demophon  and  so  the  king  is  bound  only  by  the  general  law  of 
kindness  to  suppliants.  lolaos  claims  help  in  207-212  because 
of  kinship,  as  do  the  daughters  of  Danaus  in  Supplices  274  ff . 
Krausse  l  shows  many  other  similarities  between  this  part  of 
the  Heraclidae  and  the  Supplices.  In  381-629  Macaria  sacri- 
fices herself  to  Demeter  and  Kore  in  response  to  an  oracle.  In 
630-927  the  battle  is  described  and  in  928-1055,  the  slaying 
of  Eurystheus  by  Alcmene.  We  might  obtain  a  tripartite 
division  by  making  parallel  381-629  (the  sacrifice  of  Macaria) 
and  630-747  (the  coming  of  Hyllus  and  the  arming  of  lolaos). 
These  could  then  be  compared  with  the  evocation  of  Agamem- 
non in  the  Choephori  and  the  aid  given  to  Orestes  by  his  sister. 
Thus  we  could  consider  381-927  the  second  division,  and  928- 
1055  (the  settlement  under  divine  or  heroic  influence)  can  be 
compared  to  the  Eumenides.  We  must,  however,  not  press 
such  analysis  too  far.  Euripides  probably  intended  to  treat 
the  material  in  an  epic  manner  rather  than  in  one  marked 
by  a  severe  dramatic  unity.  The  result  is  similar  to  an 
Aeschylean  trilogy.  Mr.  Sheppard  neglects  this  when  he 
says:2 

1  De  Euripide  Aeschyli  instauratore,  p.  67  f .        2  Greek  Tragedy,  p.  141. 


14  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

"  In  each  [the  Heraclidae  and  the  Supplices  of  Euripides]  the  simple 
theme  (a  coming  of  weak  suppliants  to  Athens,  a  fight  for  their  cause, 
victory,  and  the  promise  of  benefits  that  piety  has  earned)  proves 
inadequate  in  these  days  when  the  part  of  the  chorus  is  comparatively 
small.  In  each  the  play  is  lengthened  and  the  interest  complicated 
by  an  episode.  The  excuse  is  the  freedom  of  the  old-fashioned  type  of 
drama." 

Our  ignorance  as  to  the  form  of  Euripides'  source  prevents 
an  emphatic  statement,  but  we  seem  to  have  a  kind  of  trilogy 
The  Reception  of  Suppliants,  The  Defeat  of  the  Invaders,  The 
Gaining  of  Eurystheus  as  a  Hero-ally  of  Athens. 

The  Supplices,  dealing  with  the  expedition  of  Theseus  to 
recover  the  bodies  of  those  who  had  fallen  on  the  expedition 
of  Adrastus,  opens  in  the  usual  manner  of  suppliant-plays. 
The  argument  between  Theseus  and  Adrastus  is  unusual,  but 
such  a  dispute  is  indicated  in  Aesch.  Supp.  340  ff.  where  Pe- 
lasgus  hesitates  to  receive  the  maidens.  If  we  followed  analogy, 
we  should  consider  1-597  as  the  first  section.  Krausse  1  com- 
pares the  language  of  these  lines  to  that  of  the  Supplices  of 
Aeschylus.  It  is  harder  to  analyze  598-1234.  If  we  should 
consider  the  second  part  (the  rescue  of  the  bodies)  as  ending 
at  1113,  the  third  division  would  contain  merely  the  appear- 
ance of  Athena  and  the  establishment  of  friendship  between 
Athens  and  Argos.  This,  however,  would  be  sufficient  for  our 
purpose.  In  any  event,  the  Evadne-Iphis  scene 2  seems  dis- 
connected. In  fact  the  passage  598-1234  is  rather  similar  to 
the  ending  of  many  plays  of  Euripides.3  Perhaps  the  play  is 
based  on  a  shorter  mythos.  The  Supplices,  an  tyKuniov  'A6i)- 
vaiuv  (as  the  Hypothesis  calls  it),  is  structurally  successful,  since 
the  divisions  are  not  so  clearly  marked  as  in  either  the 
Heraclidae  or  the  Hippolytus,  although  the  play  contains  one 
loosely  connected  scene. 

1  Op.  tit.,  p.  75.  z  980-1113. 

*  Cf.  Murray,  Ritual  Forms,  in  Themis,  p.  354. 


THE  STRUCTURE  OF  THE  DRAMA  15 

The  Andromache  is  much  less  unified.  1-308  form  a  parallel 
to  the  opening  division  of  suppliant-plays,  but  we  should  prob- 
ably count  1-801  as  the  first  section,  since  Menelaus  takes  Her- 
mione's  place  in  the  quarrel  with  Andromache,  and  Peleus 
saves  the  unhappy  woman,  much  as  Pelasgus  does  the  daughters 
of  Danaus  in  Aesch.  Supp.  911  ff.  Such  a  change  of  characters 
is  seen  in  the  Ajax  where  Agamemnon  supports  his  brother 
against  Teucer.  The  second  division  is  802-1046,  the  departure 
of  Hermione,  and  the  third  is  1047-1288,  the  fate  of  Neoptole- 
mus.  Prof.  Verrall's  explanation  that  Neoptolemus  had  been 
killed  before  Orestes  left  Delphi  and  that  Menelaus,  in  order 
that  his  daughter  might  leave  her  husband  willingly  and  marry 
Orestes,  instigated  the  quarrel  with  Andromache,1  provides 
unity  but  is  unnecessary.  The  structure  is  very  lax  and  the 
main  bond  of  union  is  sequence  in  time.  The  play  seems  like 
a  slice  from  an  epic  rather  than  a  well  constructed  drama. 

The  Hercules  Furens  is  of  much  the  same  type.  The  subject 
is  in  two  distinct  parts,  although  we  may  find  a  tripartite 
division.  In  1-814,  the  suppliant-motif  occurs  again.  Heracles 
arrives  in  time  to  save  his  family  from  death  at  the  hands  of 
Lycus.  At  815,  Iris  and  Lyssa  appear  and  Heracles  becomes 
insane  and  kills  his  family.  The  entrance  of  Theseus  at  1153 
is  to  comfort  Heracles.  Perhaps  we  should  take  as  the  second 
section  815-1087  and  regard  it  as  parallel  to  the  Choephori, 
which  also  ends  with  the  protagonist  insane.  The  appearance 
of  the  goddesses  at  the  opening  of  this  section  is  much  like  that 
of  Apollo  and  Qavaros  in  the  Alcestis  and  of  Poseidon  and  Athena 
in  the  Troades.  Finally,  1088-1428  (the  healing  and  comfort- 
ing of  Heracles)  can  be  compared  to  the  Eumenides,  except  that 
a  hero,  not  a  god,  enters.  The  only  unity  in  thought  is  furnished 
by  the  idea  of  the  injustice  of  the  gods.  Structurally  the  play 
is  nearer  to  the  Andromache  than  to  the  Hippolytus. 

The  Hecuba  has  a  similar  structure.  In  the  first  section  (1-97), 
1  Four  Plays  of  Euripides,  p.  28  ff. 


16  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

the  ghost  of  Polydorus  predicts  the  course  of  events  and  Hecuba 
is  terrified  by  the  dream  which  her  dead  son  sends.  This 
passage  may  be  compared  to  Hipp.  1-120,  in  which  the  offence 
of  Hippolytus  is  seen  and  his  fate  is  foretold.  The  second  part 
(98-656)  shows  the  fate  of  Polyxena,  and  the  third  (657-1295), 
the  punishment  of  Polymestor  for  the  murder  of  Polydorus. 
The  character  of  Hecuba  and  the  prophecy  of  Polydorus  are 
the  main  bonds  of  union.  The  play  can  almost  be  regarded 
as  the  presentation  of  two  loosely  connected  stories.  The  effect 
is  gained  through  the  delineation  of  the  cruelty  of  war  and  the 
savage  nature  of  the  leaders  —  even  of  the  sons  of  Theseus  l 
—  and  not  through  the  dramatic  structure. 

It  may  now  be  convenient  to  consider  the  earlier  plays  of 
Euripides.  If  we  were  determined  to  find  divisions  in  the  Al- 
cestis,  a  play  which  was  probably  substituted  for  a  satyric 
drama,  we  could  do  so  as  follows:  (1)  1-76,  Apollo  and  Thana- 
tos;  (2)  77-475,  568-746,  the  death  and  burial  of  Alcestis;  (3) 
476-567,  747-1163,  the  rescue  of  Alcestis  by  Heracles.  This, 
however,  is  artificial.  The  arrival  of  Heracles 2  and  the  funeral 
of  Alcestis 3  are  treated  in  interlocked  order.  Then  too  the  death 
of  Alcestis  is  not  an  independent  action  in  the  same  sense  in 
which  this  is  true  of  the  parts  of  the  Hippolytus.  Even  if  we 
adopted  such  a  division,  the  quarrel  of  Admetus  and  Pheres  4 
is  still  loosely  connected.  I  would  suggest  that  Euripides 
preserved  one  action  but  modelled  his  work  after  the  older  type 
of  drama.  Structurally  this  play  is  very  successful  as  regards 
unity. 

Only  one  scene  in  the  Medea  breaks  the  dramatic  action. 
Aegeus  offers  Medea  a  refuge  at  Athens,5  apparently  because 
in  the  tradition  she  did  flee  to  his  court.  Dramatically  therefore 
it  is  a  fault.  Another  slight  weakness  is  seen  in  1317  ff.,  where 
Medea  receives  her  dragon-car  only  in  time  to  save  her  chil- 

1  123-129.  3  568-746.  5  663-763. 

2  476-567.  4  611-740. 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF   THE   DRAMA  17 

dren's  bodies.  This  might  arouse  ironical  reflections  on  the 
care  of  the  gods  for  mortals,  but  it  is  a  weakness,  unless  we 
assume  that  it  was  part  of  the  traditional  account.  If  so,  it 
has  been  treated  admirably.  This  play  is  almost  the  least  epi- 
sodic of  any  of  Euripides'  extant  dramas  or,  perhaps  we  might 
say,  the  least  epic. 

The  later  plays  of  Euripides  are  in  some  ways  nearer  to  these 
dramas  than  to  those  of  the  epoch  of  the  Hippolytus.  The  Ion 
is  a  thinly  veiled  attack  on  Apollo.  The  scenes  are  some- 
what loosely  connected,  but  the  tripartite  division  (1-509, 
the  bewilderment  of  Ion;  510-1243,  the  adoption  of  Ion  by 
Xuthus  and  the  futile  attempt  of  Creusa  to  poison  the  young 
man;  1244-1622,  the  recognition  of  Ion  as  Creusa's  child) 
is  artificial.  The  characters  are  few  and  in  fact  Ion  and  Creusa 
dominate  the  piece.  Then  the  failure  of  the  attempted  murder 
reveals  the  secret  of  Ion's  birth  and  thwarts  the  plans  of  Apollo.1 
There  is  a  romantic  touch  which  is  not  found  previously  in  the 
work  of  Euripides,  and  in  Ion's  monody  2  there  is  a  charming 
idyllic  touch.  This  play  opens  a  new  series  of  dramas  with  free 
but  masterly  technique  and  a  light  touch  that  might  lead  to  a 
development  into  mere  melodrama. 

The  Troades,  however,  is  a  remarkable  drama.  The  gloom 
of  the  piece  is  unbroken.  In  Ag.  429  ff.,  Aeschylus  paints  the 
horror  and  the  sin  of  war  and  exclaims  : 

T&V  iro\vK.r()V(j3v  yap  OVK 
3 


Euripides  feels  the  horror  and  barbarity  of  war  more  than  the 
sin  and  says  : 

/uiopos  5^  BvrjT&v  ooris  tKiropQtl  TroXeis, 
vaovs  Tf  TUM/Sous  0'  ,  iepa  T&V 
dovs  aur6$  &\cd' 


1  Cf.  1563  ff.  *  461-462. 

1  82-183.  «  95-97. 


18  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

This  is  the  keynote.  The  folly  and  outrages  of  the  Greeks 
justify  the  words  of  Andromache  1  that  the  dead  are  happier 
than  the  living.  The  plot  of  Athena  and  Poseidon  to  destroy 
the  Greek  fleet  lends  an  added  horror  to  the  whole.  The  char- 
acter of  Hecuba  placed  in  relation  to  the  other  characters 
furnishes  the  only  excuse  for  unity.  The  play  is  merely  a 
series  of  scenes  showing  the  sack  of  Troy,  but  these  are  most 
skilfully  constructed.  Euripides  shows  how  untrustworthy  is 
the  loyalty  of  the  conquered  when  he  represents  Hecuba  saying 
to  Andromache: 


KCU  7rcu5a  rovde  irat.56s  €K0pei/'eias  Q.V 
Tpota  nkyurrov  w<£eX?7ju',  1v'  —  el  irore 
€K  <roD  yev6/j,evoi  7raI5es    "IXtoj'  ira.\iv 
KaTOuicreiav,  /cat  TroXis  ykvoir'  en.2 


This  speech  explains  why  the  Greeks  decided  to  kill  Astyanax. 
Although  the  play  is  so  different  from  the  Ion,  the  search  for 
effectiveness  in  individual  scenes  suggests  that  it  is  of  much  the 
same  date.  The  position  of  the  scene  with  Helen  in  the  mid- 
dle of  the  description  of  the  fate  of  Astyanax,  seems  to  be  an 
instance  of  a  device  worked  out  later  in  the  Phoenissae. 

In  structure,  the  Electro,  is  quite  near  the  Ion.  We  do  not 
find  here  the  romantic  note  of  that  play,  but  there  is  an  appre- 
ciation of  the  excellence  of  the  humble  in  the  depiction  of  Elec- 
tra's  husband.  The  details  of  the  play  are  very  different  from 
those  of  the  Choephori  and  the  Electra  of  Sophocles.  At  the 
end,  the  Dioscuri  appear  and  condemn  Apollo  for  ordering  the 
murder.  As  in  the  Ion,  the  scenes  are  not  very  closely  con- 
nected, but  the  main  divisions  of  the  play  —  the  recognition  of 
brother  and  sister,  the  death  of  Aegisthus,  and  the  murder  of 
Clytaemestra  —  do  not  form  sections  as  distinct  as  in  the 
Hippolytus.  Rather,  as  in  the  Ion,  such  an  arrangement  is 
artificial. 

1  634-683.  *  702-705. 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF   THE   DRAMA  19 

The  Iphigenia  in  Tauris  is  similar  in  structure.  On  the  whole 
it  possesses  unity.  As  a  play  of  romantic  adventure  in  a  dis- 
tant land,  it  is  very  charming  and  far  surpasses  the  Ion  and  the 
Electro,.  There  may  be  a  slight  touch,  but  only  a  slight  one,  of 
the  melodrama  which  becomes  so  prominent  in  later  plays. 

The  Helena  is  the  most  romantic  of  Euripides'  plays  and  the 
lightest,  but  it  has  not  the  careful  balance  of  the  Iphigenia  in 
Tauris.  There  Orestes  and  Iphigenia  were  both  of  equal  im- 
portance. Here  Menelaus  is  not  very  attractive  and  is  at  times 
almost  comic.  Structurally  also  it  is  not  so  good.  The  scene 
between  Helen  and  Teucer  1  shows  the  reputation  of  Helen 
among  the  Greeks.  As  a  prelude  and  introduction,  it  is  almost 
as  separate  as  the  opening  of  the  Hecuba,  but  it  is  an  exposition- 
scene  and  does  not  indicate  the  future.  Helen's  fears  are 
almost  at  once  quieted  by  Theonoe.  The  scene  with  Theonoe 2 
forms  a  slight  break  between  the  reunion  of  husband  and  wife 
and  their  escape  from  the  power  of  Theoclymenus.  The  effect 
of  the  play  is  good  and  an  impression  of  unity  is  given,  largely 
because  of  the  phantom-Helen  and  the  frivolous  character 
given  by  Theonoe  to  the  conflict  of  Hera  and  Aphrodite,  who 
seem  not  powerful  goddesses  but  mere  fairies. 

The  Hypsipyle,  of  which  large  fragments  have  recently  been 
discovered,  belongs  to  the  same  period.  Although  we  do  not 
know  all  the  details  of  the  plot,  we  can  see  the  general  out- 
lines. Hypsipyle,  as  a  slave  of  Eurydice,  cares  for  the  baby 
Archemorus.  Her  two  sons,  whom  she  has  not  seen  since  they 
were  babes,  while  searching,  happen  to  meet  her  and  ask  for 
hospitality.  Of  course  there  is  no  recognition  on  either  side. 
She  takes  them  into  her  mistress's  house.  Meanwhile  Amphi- 
araus  comes  and  asks  for  water  for  the  sacred  rites.  While 
Hypsipyle  guides  him  to  the  spring,  a  serpent  kills  Archemorus. 
In  terror,  the  unhappy  slave  tries  to  escape,  but  she  is  captured 
by  the  two  young  men  and  taken  back  to  Eurydice,  who  wishes 
1  68-163.  »  865-1029. 


20  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

to  slay  her.  Amphiaraus  returns,  saves  her,  and  proclaims 
funeral  games  in  honor  of  the  dead  child.  Later  he  unites 
Hypsipyle  with  her  two  sons,  and  Dionysus  appears  as  deus 
ex  machina,  probably  to  confirm  Amphiaraus'  action.  The 
Hypsipyle  is  another  romantic  drama  with  almost  melodramatic 
variation  in  the  fortunes  of  the  main  characters.  Still,  interest 
centres  in  Hypsipyle  and  her  sons,  so  that  the  play  has  unity 
in  the  same  sense  as  the  Ion  and  the  Iphigenia  in  Tauris. 

The  Phoenissae  is  a  wonderful  example  of  inclusion,  since  it 
touches  the  whole  Theban  cycle.  There  are  three  main  strands : 
(1)  the  fate  of  Thebes,  especially  prominent  in  the  view  from 
the  walls  (88-201),  the  preparations  and  the  battle  (690-1199), 
and  the  lament  for  Menoeceus  (1308-1334);  (2)  the  fate  of  the 
brothers,  especially  prominent  in  the  meeting  (261-637)  and 
the  combat  (1202-1282,  1335-1529);  (3)  the  fate  of  Oedipus 
(1530-1763).  Probably  the  representation  of  Oedipus  and 
Jocasta  as  alive  at  the  time  of  the  expedition  of  Polynices  was 
an  invention  of  Euripides.  The  Hypothesis  gives  a  good  criti- 
cism. To  dpa/jLO.  lo-ri  fjitv  rats  ain]viK.aA.s  o\l/f<ri  Ka\6v,  t-rrtl  Koii 
irapair\rip(i)iJLa.TLK6v.  tf  re  airo  T&V  T6ixtcoi>  'Avnyovt]  dewpovcra 
/xepos  OVK  eon  Spdjuaros,  *cai  virocrirovdos  HoXwelKiqs  ovSevos  evena 
irapa.'YiveTcu,  6  re  CTTI  Tratrt,  /xer'  <j>5f;s  a86\ecrxov  JMTfO&tutftiVOS 
Oidiirovs  Trpoo-eppairrat  5ia  KWTJS. 

"The  pleasure  of  witnessing  this  drama  must  have  depended  on  a 
knowledge  of  much  literature  now  lost;  happily  we  possess  enough 
to  make  most  of  the  scenes  alive."  1 

There  are  inconsistencies,  especially  in  the  final  scene,  and 
many  critics  have  claimed  to  find  much  interpolation  in  it.2 
The  play  seems  more  coherent  than  the  Troades.  While  this 
is  due  to  our  better  knowledge  of  the  sources,  the  subject  has 
more  inherent  unity.  Structurally  it  is  more  involved  than 

1  Sheppard,  Greek  Tragedy,  p.  144. 

1  Cf.  Wilamowitz,  Drei  Schluftscenen,  Sitzungsbericht  d.  kgl.  Preuss. 
Akad.  d.  Wiss.  zu  Berlin,  1903,  p.  587  8 . 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF  THE   DRAMA  21 

the  Troades,  but  it  has  the  same  mixture  of  epic  and  dramatic 
qualities. 

The  Orestes,  the  last  of  the  Greek  dramas  that  belong  in  this 
series,  is  almost  pure  melodrama.  The  plot  is  full  of  the  unex- 
pected and  the  play  has  as  much  unity  as  is  consistent  with  it. 
To  point  out  merely  one  neglect  of  probability,  the  prologue 
shows  Orestes  very  ill,  but  he  suddenly  recovers  and  goes 
off  to  the  assembly.  This  play  marks  the  lowest  level  which 
the  art  of  Euripides  reached,  as  far  as  we  can  judge. 

It  is  well  for  the  poet  that  this  was  not  his  last  work.  He 
left  Athens  and  during  his  residence  in  Macedon,  he  wrote  the 
Bacchae,  an  unusually  vivid  and  powerful  play.  The  chorus 
is  much  more  important  than  in  most  of  his  plays  and  also 
much  more  vitally  interested  in  the  action  than  it  usually  is. 
Although  some  of  the  scenes,  as  that  between  Pentheus,  Tiresias, 
and  Cadmus,1  are  somewhat  loosely  connected,  yet  these,  like 
the  opening  scenes  of  the  Agamemnon,  show  the  atmosphere 
of  the  piece  and  illustrate  the  ever  increasing  sin  of  Pentheus. 
There  is  more  action  in  this  than  in  the  Septem,  but  the  spirit 
of  the  play  is  almost  Aeschylean  rather  than  Euripidean.  It 
is  a  true  lyric  drama  of  the  old  type. 

The  Iphigenia  in  Aulide  is  another  play  of  the  same  style 
and  shows  that  Euripides'  art  had  definitely  entered  a  new 
period.  The  play  has  unity  and  it  shows  traces  of  the  lyric 
character  of  the  works  of  Aeschylus.  Agamemnon's  position 
and  the  atmosphere  of  the  play  are  presented  in  1-589.  It  is 
as  impossible  to  define  subdivisions  in  the  play  as  it  is  in  the 
plays  of  Aeschylus.  Structurally  this  is  one  of  the  most  satis- 
factory dramas  of  Euripides.  The  melodramatic  note  is  absent 
and  the  romantic  elements  are  unusually  pleasant.  The  char- 
acter of  Iphigenia,  the  willing  victim,  is,  in  spite  of  Aristotle's 
curious  judgment,  worthy  of  a  great  lyric  drama. 

I  do  not  think  that  the  Rhesus  is  spurious. 
1  170-369. 


22  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

"It  is  a  young  man's  play,  full  of  war  and  adventure,  of  spies  in 
wolf-skins  and  white  chargers  and  gallant  chivalry.  That  is  not  much 
like  the  Euripides  whom  we  know  elsewhere;  but  his  mark  is  upon 
the  last  scene,  in  which  the  soldiers  stand  embarrassed  and  silent 
while  a  solitary  mother  weeps  over  her  dead  son.  The  poetry  of  the 
scene  is  exquisite;  but  what  is  most  characteristic  is  the  sudden  flavour 
of  bitterness,  the  cold  wind  that  so  suddenly  takes  the  heart  out  of 
joyous  war."1 

The  structure  of  this  piece  is  interesting,  as  it  is  the  only  extant 
tragedy  based  on  an  extant  piece  of  epic  poetry.  The  play  falls 
into  three  divisions:  (1)  1-263,  the  mission  of  Dolon;  (2)  264- 
691,  the  reception  and  death  of  Rhesus;  (3)  692-996,  the  ac- 
cusation of  Hector  by  the  charioteer  and  the  appearance  of  the 
Muse.  There  is  a  kind  of  tripartite  division,  but  this  is  rather  of 
the  species  found  in  the  Alcestis  than  of  that  in  the  Hippolytus, 
since  in  the  plays  of  the  period  of  the  latter,  the  parts  are  less 
closely  connected.  The  first  section  serves  rather  as  a  prepara- 
tion for  the  rest  of  the  drama  than  as  a  distinct  and  independent 
division  or  as  an  illustration  of  the  theme.  Throughout  the 
Rhesus,  Hector  is  the  main  character,  as  he  is  prominent  in  the 
three  sections.  The  structure  may  seem  crude,  but  the  play 
well  shows  the  poet's  peculiar  use  of  his  material.  He  has 
followed  Iliad  X  closely  except  in  regard  to  the  foundation  of 
the  cult  of  Rhesus.  There  was  such  a  cult  in  Thrace.2  Per- 
haps this  was  connected  with  the  play  in  imitation  of  the  usage 
of  Aeschylus,  who  delights  in  ending  his  trilogies  with  some 
"  foundation."  In  view  of  the  structure  of  the  Rhesus,  we  need 
not  follow  Wilamowitz  3  in  rejecting  it  as  a  work  of  Euripides. 
Our  knowledge  of  the  lost  plays  is  too  scanty  to  allow  us  to 
say  that  no  dramas  prior  to  the  Andromache  contained  a  deus 
ex  machina.  The  Rhesus,  then,  seems  a  work  of  the  first  period 
of  Euripides'  activity. 

1  Murray,  Euripides  and  His  Age,  p.  70. 

z  Rohde,  Psyche 8,  Vol.  I,  p.  161  N.  3  Analecta  Euripidea,  p.  157. 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF   THE   DRAMA  23 

The  Cyclops  is  the  only  extant  satyric  play  of  Euripides. 
This  follows  closely  Odyssey  IX  with  such  changes  as  are  neces- 
sary to  fit  it  for  the  stage.  The  chorus  of  Satyrs,  except  in  the 
prologue  and  parodos,  is  of  slight  importance,  as  it  excuses 
itself  whenever  there  is  need  of  action.  Since  the  play  is  a 
dramatization  of  a  story  which  possesses  perfect  unity,  it  could 
hardly  fail  to  show  the  same  quality.  In  general  the  Cyclops 
seems  to  be  of  the  same  period  as  the  Medea;  but  because  of 
our  lack  of  definite  information  and  our  ignorance  concerning 
the  satyric  drama  as  a  whole,  it  is  useless  to  discuss  the  date. 
The  ending,  a  threat  of  the  Cj^clops  against  Odysseus,1  is  an 
adaptation  of  Odyssey  IX,  480  ff  .  Such  a  conclusion,  promising 
a  continued  conflict,  reminds  us  of  the  end  of  the  Septem  of 
Aeschylus.  Perhaps  another  argument  for  an  early  date  can 
be  drawn  from  the  fact  that  Euripides  makes  no  effort  to  gain 
the  sympathy  of  the  audience  for  the  Cyclops. 

Various  scholars  have  argued  as  to  Euripides'  use  of  connected 
trilogies.  Krausse  2  endeavors  to  prove  this  in  the  series  Alex- 
ander, Palamedes,  Troades.  Although  these  are  all  from  the 
Trojan  cycle,  he  himself  admits  3  that  the  Palamedes  is  very 
loosely  connected.  He  also  considers  the  Oenomaus,  Chry  sip- 
pus,  Phoenissae,  another  instance.4  Wilamowitz  5  holds  the 
same  view  and  connects  the  absence  of  a  deus  ex  machina  in 
the  Troades  and  Phoenissae  with  the  fact  that  they  were  the 
concluding  plays  of  trilogies.  Although  the  Septem  does  not 
contain  a  theophany,  yet  the  Oresteia  does,  and  in  general  we 
should  expect  the  gods  to  appear  at  the  end  of  a  connected 
trilogy  rather  more  frequently  than  at  the  end  of  either  of  the 
first  two  plays.  Our  evidence  on  this  whole  subject  is  too  scanty 
to  give  basis  for  argument. 

Krausse  also  argues  that  some  trilogies  are  dominated  by 
one  idea.  Thus  in  the  tetralogy,  Cressae,  Alcmaeon  dia 


1  704-707.  »  Op.  cU.,  p.  183.  •  Op.  tit.,  p.  181. 

1  Op.  til.,  p.  179  ff.  «  Op.  tit.,  p.  184  ff. 


24  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

Telephus,  Alcestis,  the  virtues  and  vices  of  women  are  repre- 
sented.1 The  weakness  of  such  theorizing  can  be  easily  seen. 
He  thinks  that  the  Iphigenia  in  Aulide,  Alcmaeon  5id  KopivBov, 
and  Bacchae  show  the  relations  of  parents  and  children.2  Paul 
Girard 3  argues  for  the  moral,  "  Tantum  religio  potuit  suadere 
malorum."  This  second  interpretation  I  think  mistaken,  as 
the  Bacchae  seems  a  sincere  glorification  of  Dionysus  and  in 
the  Iphigenia  in  Aulide  Calchas  may  be  more  responsible  for 
the  murder  than  Artemis.  Of  course  Euripides  may  have  had 
some  general  idea  which  determined  his  choice  of  subjects, 
but  we  know  too  little  of  the  methods  of  grouping  used  by  any 
of  the  tragic  poets  to  hazard  any  conclusions. 

Krausse's  theory 4  that  Euripides  treated  prologue  and  epi- 
logue in  such  a  way  as  to  include  the  whole  substance  of  an 
Aeschylean  trilogy  will  be  discussed  later.  It  will  suffice 
here  to  say  that  it  seems  impossible  to  accept  his  views  in  all 
details. 

We  can  now  review  the  methods  of  Euripides.  In  each  of 
the  four  periods  into  which  Wilamowitz5  divides  the  poet's 
activity,  we  find  a  definite  style  of  composition.  In  the  first 
period  (454-430  B.C.),  traces  of  a  tripartite  division  are  hardly 
definite  but  are  clearest  in  the  Rhesus.  The  other  plays  aim 
more  at  unity  of  action.  If  the  Rhesus  and  the  Cyclops  both 
belong  here,  it  is  interesting  to  see  how  closely  Euripides  fol- 
lowed epic  tradition  in  theme  and  treatment  with  strong  ten- 
dencies to  strict  unity. 

In  the  second  period  (430-416  B.C.),  he  abandoned  quite 
frankly  his  search  for  unity  and  aimed  to  produce  plays  each 
containing  several  actions  more  or  less  closely  connected.  Early 
in  this  period,  in  the  Hippolytus,  we  see  the  whole  well  articu- 
lated and  approximating  the  form  of  an  Aeschylean  trilogy. 

1  Op.  tit.,  p.  188.  z  Op.  tit.,  p.  188. 

3  La  trilogie  chez  Euripide,  Revue  des  eludes  grecquea,  Vol.  XVII, 
p.  175  ff.  4  Op.  tit.,  p.  48.  8  Ibid.,  p.  172. 


THE   STRUCTURE   OF   THE   DRAMA  25 

In  other  plays,  there  is  no  attempt  at  close  connection  of  the 
different  parts. 

In  the  third  period  (415-408  B.C.),  Euripides  aimed  rather 
to  produce  a  thrilling  effect.  His  plays  contain  much  adven- 
ture and  melodrama.  They  often  seem  to  have  been  written 
to  appeal  to  the  mass  of  the  people  who  were  the  real  judges 
in  the  dramatic  contests.  Unity  here  is  gained  by  the  presenta- 
tion of  a  small  number  of  characters  in  whose  fate  the  audi- 
ence became  interested.  Here  belongs  also  the  Troades,  a  play 
based  on  the  lyric  tradition,  effective  without  unity,  and  the 
Phoenissae,  a  summary  of  Theban  legend. 

In  the  fourth  period  (407—406  B.C.),  Euripides  returned  to 
the  older  type  of  drama  and  achieved  unity  better  than  he  had 
ever  done.  The  aged  man  received  fresh  vigor  from  his  life  in 
Macedonia  and  was  enabled  to  surpass  in  beauty  any  of  his 
earlier  work  now  extant. 

What  then  is  the  record  of  the  formal  development  of  Greek 
tragedy?  Aeschylus  composed  mainly  in  trilogies,  groups  of 
plays  treated  as  acts  of  still  greater  dramas  involving  genera- 
tions or  ages.  The  Persae  seems  to  be  an  independent  play  with 
strict  unity.  Indeed  most  of  his  plays  show  strict  unity,  although 
the  lyric  and  descriptive  elements  predominate. 

Sophocles  abandoned  the  use  of  the  trilogy  and  emphasized 
the  delineation  of  character.  He  usually  attained  unity  in 
structure,  although  he  at  times  obscured  it  by  depicting  too 
carefully  a  subordinate  character  and  thus  shifting  the  centre  of 
interest.  In  the  Oedipus  Coloneus,  however,  he  adopted  the 
methods  of  Euripides. 

Euripides  never  attained  such  perfect  unity  as  Sophocles, 
for  he  did  not  seek  it.  He  often  makes  wonderful  character- 
studies,  but  like  Aeschylus  he  is  more  interested  in  the  story. 
He  freely  adopts  the  older  forms  of  tragedy  and  shows  the 
influence  of  epic  elements  in  his  structure,  with  the  result  that 
his  plays  often  seem  poorly  constructed. 


26  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

Tragedy  commences  its  career  as  a  union  of  choral  songs  and 
dialogues.  The  individual  scenes  become  progressively  more 
subservient  to  the  idea  of  the  whole  until  Euripides  appears. 
He  allows  the  chorus  to  diminish  and  he  rejects  much  of  the 
technique  of  Sophocles.  He  puts  into  one  play  enough  material 
for  an  Aeschylean  trilogy.  However  he  varies  his  methods, 
his  plays  always  seem  in  a  way  dramatized  epics,  but  he  never 
violates  the  injunction  of  Aristotle:1  xp*l  5e  ovrep  etpr/rat  7roXX<ms 
ai  /cat  ;UT)  iroieiv  kiroTrouKov  (rixrrTj/za  Tpayudlav  —  kiroTrouKOV 
r6  iro\vp.vQov  —  olov  et  rts  rov  rrjs  'IXia5os  oXo?  TTOIOI  nvQov. 
Then  at  the  end  the  old  spirit  of  tragedy  blazes  up,  and  in  the 
swan-song  of  Greek  tragedy  we  feel  "the  spirit  of  the  days 
that  are  no  more."  There  our  record  ends. 
1  Poetics,  p.  1456  a  10  ff . 


CHAPTER  II 

THE   PROLOGUES   AND   EPILOGUES   OF  EURIPIDES 

IN  the  Ranae,  945  f.,  Aristophanes  represents  Euripides  as 
boasting  of  his  prologues: 

aXX'  ov£uj)v  Trpamora  p.kv  /JLOL  TO  yevos  efir'  av  evdiis 

TOV    dpa/JLCLTOS. 

Prof.  Murray  x  supposes  that  Euripides  had  returned  to  a  form 
found  in  the  primitive  drama,  a  solemn  address  by  a  sacred  or 
mysterious  figure.  Whatever  the  cause  may  be,  it  seems  as 
if  Euripides  put  too  much  information  into  his  prologues,  even 
if  some  of  those  now  extant  show  signs  of  interpolation. 

Krausse 2  says  that  in  his  prologues  and  epilogues,  Euripides 
touches  material  which  Aeschylus  would  have  used  for  the 
other  plays  of  the  trilogy.  The  first  speech  of  the  prologue  of 
the  Electro, 3  reviews  the  expedition  to  Troy,  the  murder  of 
Agamemnon,  and  the  fate  of  his  children.  In  the  epilogue,4 
the  Dioscuri  order  the  marriage  of  Electra  and  Pylades  and 
prophesy  the  acquittal  of  Orestes  at  Athens.  Thus  the  poet 
reviews  in  one  play  the  material  of  the  Oresteia. 

A  long  account  in  strict  form  is  seen  in  the  opening  of  the 
Hecuba,  Supplices,  Hercules  Furens,  Ion,  Electra,  Iphigenia 
in  Tauris,  Helena,  Phoenissae,  Orestes,  and  Bacchae.  The 
Archelaus,6  the  Melanippe  i)  acx^ij,8  and  the  Phrixus 7  and  per- 
haps others  of  the  lost  plays  began  thus. 

1  Ritual  Farms,  p.  361  ff.  *  1-53.  *  Frag.  228. 

*  Op.  tit.,  p.  48.  «  1238-1291.  «  Ibid.,  481. 

7  Ibid.,  819. 


28  A    STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

Examples  of  such  a  usage  in  the  works  of  Aeschylus  natu- 
rally occur  in  the  opening  plays  of  the  trilogies,  but  we  must 
remember  that  Aeschylus  often  uses  lyric  metres  where  Eurip- 
ides employs  trimeters.  The  parodos  of  the  Agamemnon 1 
describes  in  beautiful  poetry  the  events  leading  up  to  the 
Trojan  expedition  and  the  sacrifice  of  Iphigenia.  Less  good 
examples,  because  of  their  closer  connection  with  the  plot,  are 
the  parodoi  of  the  Supplices,2  containing  the  account  of  the 
voyage  of  the  maidens  to  Argos,  and  of  the  Persae,3  reviewing 
the  expedition  of  Xerxes.  In  this  latter  case  the  foreign 
names  lend  an  air  of  remoteness.  In  the  Prometheus  Vinctus, 
Prometheus  after  the  departure  of  his  persecutors  breaks 
his  long  silence  and  in  iambic  trimeters  tells  the  chorus  of 
his  service  to  Zeus  during  the  revolt  of  the  Titans  and  of  his 
theft  of  fire.4  Finally  the  Eumenides,  although  the  last  play 
of  a  trilogy,  contains  a  very  apposite  passage,  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  successive  masters  and  the  present  cults  of  Delphi.6 
This  is  used  to  show  the  relation  of  the  older  and  younger 
deities. 

Sophocles  uses  such  narratives  sparingly.  Although  we 
might  cite  Trachiniae  1-48,  a  review  by  Deianira  of  her  mar- 
riage to  Heracles  and  of  her  subsequent  life,  and  Electro,  23  ff., 
Orestes'  account  of  the  oracle  of  Apollo  in  regard  to  vengeance, 
such  cases  are  very  unimportant  and  hardly  deserve  mention. 

The  form  as  found  in  the  Iphigenia  in  Tauris  is  then  a  de- 
velopment of  Aeschylean  usage.  Thus,  much  as  the  chorus  in 
the  parodos  of  the  Agamemnon  describes  the  Trojan  war, 
Iphigenia  reviews  the  history  of  her  race  from  the  time  of 
Pelops  to  her  own  sacrifice  at  Aulis,  and  then  tells  her  dream 
about  Orestes. 

The  situation  at  the  end  is  less  clear.  In  the  Eumenides, 
Orestes  promises  to  Athens  the  eternal  friendship  of  Argos,  6 

1  104-257.  3  1-64.  6  1-33. 

J  1-18.  «  199-243.  6  754-777. 


THE   PROLOGUES   AND   EPILOGUES   OF   EURIPIDES  29 

and  Athena  declares  the  court  of  the  Areopagus  permanent.1 
Because  of  his  use  of  the  trilogy,  it  was  not  so  necessary  for 
Aeschylus  to  employ  long  concluding  narrations.  Yet  the 
Septem  ends  in  an  unresolved  conflict  and  the  Persae  with  a 
mourning  procession.  So,  too,  in  the  Trachiniae  of  Sophocles 
Heracles  is  borne  off  to  Oeta  for  burning,  and  in  the  Oedipus 
Coloneus  the  daughters  of  Oedipus  leave  for  Thebes  in  an 
endeavor  to  reconcile  their  brothers. 

The  Greek  drama,  drawing  its  themes  from  the  epic  cycle, 
frequently  found  it  necessary  (as  indeed  all  drama  does)  to 
leave  conflicts  unresolved.  The  Cyclops  is  a  good  example. 
On  the  Athenian  stage,  the  Cyclops  could  not  carry  out  his 
threat  to  sink  the  ship  of  Odysseus  with  rocks,  and  so  the  blinded 
giant  says  that  he  will  do  it. 

We  can  now  see  in  what  sense  we  can  accept  Krausse's  theory. 
A  play  of  Euripides  in  its  prologue  and  exodos  often  does  con- 
tain all  the  material  of  an  Aeschylean  trilogy.  Still,  as  such 
narrations  are  found  even  in  plays  which  approximate  the 
trilogy-form,  we  must  not  press  too  far  arguments  from  extent 
of  material.  In  his  historical  preludes,  Aeschylus  is  less  formal 
than  Euripides,  but  the  methods  of  the  two  men  are  sufficiently 
similar  to  suggest  that  the  younger  man  had  revived  the  custom 
of  the  older  author. 

It  is  easy  to  see  the  cause  of  Aristophanes'  ridicule.  Aes- 
chylus had  veiled  his  account  with  beautiful  poetry,  or  had 
incorporated  it  within  the  play.  Euripides,  in  his  desire  for 
clearness,  his  love  of  rhetoric,  and  his  need  of  brevity,  made 
a  set  form  for  this  recital  and  placed  it  at  the  very  opening  of 
the  play.  The  use  of  such  a  prologue  may  have  been  a  return 
to  a  primitive  form,  but  it  seems  largely  due  to  the  influence  of 
Aeschylus  and  to  Euripides'  own  modification  of  the  forms  of 
his  predecessor. 

In  the  earlier  plays,  as  the  Medea,  the  prologue  is  less 
1  681-710. 


30  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

schematic  and  contains  less  material  foreign  to  the  theme  of 
the  play.  Well  within  the  second  period,  we  find  more  formal 
speeches  with  more  emphasis  on  genealogy.  In  the  third  period, 
the  form  of  the  Iphigenia  in  Tauris  is  typical  and  we  find  this 
also  in  the  Bacchae. 

It  seems  as  if  Euripides  must  have  recognized  the  artistic 
weakness  of  this  form  of  exposition,  unless  he  felt  it  fitting 
because  of  the  epic  elements  in  the  drama.  In  this  connec- 
tion, it  is  significant  that  the  two  dramas  based  on  extant 
epic  sources  are  probably  from  a  time  early  in  his  career. 
Yet,  in  spite  of  the  justification  of  epic  usage,  the  constant 
tendency  to  this  mannerism  may  be  thought  excessive.  Cer- 
tainly Aristophanes  wearied  of  it  and  satirized  it  as  a  special 
achievement  of  Euripides. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE   PARODOS 

IN  the  structure  of  the  parodos,  Euripides  again  follows  Aes- 
chylus rather  than  Sophocles.  He  does  this  not  only  in  the 
metrical  structure  but  also  in  the  contents  and  the  relation 
to  the  drama  as  a  whole.  Of  course,  as  the  parodos  is  largely 
lyric,  we  must  expect  it  to  be  shorter  and  less  splendid  in  the 
plays  of  Euripides  than  in  those  of  Aeschylus,  but  we  shall 
find  that  the  younger  poet  has  arranged  the  members  in  the 
same  way  as  the  elder  did. 

1.    The  Structure  of  the  Parodos 

Aeschylus  treats  the  parodos  in  some  plays  so  that  the 
chorus  enters  in  confusion  and  haste,  a  factor  which  varies  the 
composition  of  the  song.  Usually,  however,  the  parodos  con- 
sists of  a  series  of  anapaests  followed  by  several  strophes  and 
antistrophes. 

We  must  allude  here  to  an  important  discussion.  What  is 
the  parodos?  Is  it  the  whole  first  song  of  the  chorus  or  the 
first  song  of  the  whole  chorus?  Freericks  l  argues  for  the  second 
definition  and  accordingly  supports  the  corresponding  reading 
in  Aristotle,  Poetics,  p.  1452  b  22.  In  discussing  the  opening 
of  the  Supplices,  he  maintains  that  the  anapaests  (1-39)  form 
the  prologue,  the  series  of  strophes  and  antistrophes  (40-111), 
the  parodos,  and  finally  the  strophic  series  with  ephymnia 
(112-175),  the  first  stasimon.  Prof.  Tucker2  considers  the 
anapaests  (1-39)  as  parodos  and  the  whole  lyric  section  (40-175) 
as  the  first  stasimon.  He  continues: 

1  De  Aeschyli  Supplicum  choro,  p.  22.          *  Supplices,  p.  xxxvi. 


32  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

"In  the  Persae  the  argument  says  Trpo\oyl£tt  \opfa  icpeffptuv,  i.e.  the 
anapaestic  u-ipoSos  is  itself  a  irp6\oyos.  In  Sophocles'  Electro,  there  is 
no  technical  ir&pofos  but  a  nottrfs  instead." 


Wecklein  1  apparently  considers  1-175  as  the  parodos.  The 
dispute  as  to  the  application  of  the  term  will,  I  think,  make  it 
clear  that  in  my  analysis  of  the  parodoi  in  the  extant  plays, 
I  am  not  seeking  to  destroy  all  semblance  of  order  in  this  part 
of  the  drama. 

I  shall  consider  the  parodos  to  be  that  choral  part  of  the  play 
which  follows  an  iambic  prologue,  if  one  exists,  or  else  that 
which  opens  the  play.  It  consists  of  anapaests  or  lyric  metres 
or  both,  and  is  followed  usually  by  iambic,  trochaic,  or  anapaestic 
metres.  It  is  only  in  some  plays  of  Euripides  that  this  last 
point  will  perhaps  be  troublesome.  The  following  is  an  analysis 
of  the  parodoi  in  the  extant  plays  of  Aeschylus. 

Supp.  1-175          1-39     anapaests 

40-111   5  strophic  systems 
112-175  3  strophic  systems  with  ephymnia 
Pers.  1-149  1-64     anapaests 

65-139  6  strophic  systems 
140-149  anapaests 
Sept.  78-180        78-107  astrophic  section 

108-180  3  strophic  systems 
P.  V.  188-194     88-127  anapaests   and   iambics    (spoken   by 

Prometheus) 

128-194  2   strophic  systems   sung  by   chorus 
with    the    strophes    separated    by 
anapaestic  speeches  of  Prometheus 
Ag.  40-257          40-103  anapaests 

104-139  strophic  system 

140-159  mesode 

160-257  5  strophic  systems 

1  Aschylos  Orestie,  p.  34. 


THE   PARODO8  33 

Ch.  22-83  22-74  3  strophic  systems 

75-83  epode 

Eum.  244-275  244-253  iambic  trimeters 

254-275  astrophic  section 

Our  knowledge  of  the  lost  plays  is  naturally  very  slight,  but 
a  very  few  of  the  fragments  can  be  mentioned  here. 

Frag.  131  (Myrmidones)  4  anapaests  which  Schol. 

Aristoph.  Ran.  992,  and 
Harpocration,  p.  159.  8, 
cite  as  the  opening  of 
this  play.  The  Myrmi- 
dones is  conjectured  to 
be  the  first  play  of  the 
trilogy,  Myrmidones, 
Nereides,  Phryges.1 

Frag.  190-192  (Prometheus  Solutus)  3  anapaestic  fragments 

which  have  been  pre- 
served in  various  writ- 
ers. Even  if  we  were 
not  told  it,  frag.  190 
would  be  seen  to  be 
from  the  parodos. 

Frag.  57  (Edoni)  This  fragment  of  11  ana- 

paestic lines  may  be 
placed  here,  although 
we  have  no  proof  that 
it  is  from  the  parodos. 
The  Edoni,  we  may  re- 
mark, was  the  first  play 
of  the  Lycurgeia. 

We  find  then  the  normal  form  of  the  parodos  to  be  a  series 
of  anapaestic  verses  preceding  a  lyric  section.    This  is  the  form 
1  Nauck «,  p.  42. 


34  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN    EURIPIDES 

found  in  the  Supplices,  Agamemnon,  Persae,  and  apparently  in 
the  Myrmidones  and  the  Prometheus  Solutus.  Except  the  last, 
all  of  these  are  the  first  plays  of  trilogies  or  independent  dramas. 
The  Prometheus  Vinctus  shows  a  monologue  and  then  a  dia- 
logue in  which  the  actor  uses  anapaests  and  the  chorus  lyric 
metres.  The  Choephori  alone  shows  simple  lyric  metres.  In 
the  Septem  and  the  Eumenides,  the  astrophic  form  well  suits 
the  effective  but  rapid  and  disordered  entrance  of  the  chorus. 
It  will  also  be  noticed  that  both  of  these  are  the  concluding 
plays  of  trilogies. 
Let  us  now  turn  to  the  plays  of  Sophocles. 

Ant.  100-154     100-154   2  strophic  systems  with  strophes  sep- 
arated by  anapaestic  systems    (all 
sung  by  chorus) 
Aj.  134-200       134-171   anapaests 

172-192  strophic  system 

193-200  epode 
Tr.  94-140           94-130  2  strophic  systems 

131-140  epode 

0.  R.  151-215  151-215  3  strophic  systems 
EL  86-250  86-120  anapaests  of  Electra 

101   ooo   o  u-  1  each  Part  divided 

121-232  3  strophic  systems    , 

ooo  OKA         j  i  between       chorus 

233-250  epode 

J  and  Electra 

Phil.  135-217   135-217  3  strophic  systems  and  3  anapaestic 

systems  rendered  as  follows : 
str.  1    chorus 
syst.  1   Neoptolemus 
ant.  1    chorus 

syst.  2  Neoptolemus  and  chorus 
str.  and  ant.  2   chorus 
syst.  3   Neoptolemus 
str.  and  ant.  3  Neoptolemus  and  chorus. 


THE   PARODOS  35 

0.  C.  117-253    117-206  2  strophic  systems  and  3  anapaestic 

systems  rendered  as  follows: 
str.  1   chorus 

syst.  1   Oedipus  and  chorus 
ant.  1   chorus 

syst.  2  Oedipus  and  Antigone 
str.  2  chorus,  Oedipus,  and  Antigone 
syst.  3  Oedipus 

ant.  2  Oedipus,  Antigone,  and  chorus 
207-253  astrophic  section  of  Oedipus,  Antigone, 
and  chorus 

The  structure  of  the  parodos  in  the  Ichneutae  cannot  be 
certainly  outlined  because  of  the  fragmentary  condition  of  the 
text. 

Perhaps  we  might  assign  frag.  248,  249  to  the  parodos  of  the 
Inachus  and  frag.  491,  492  to  the  parodos  of  the  Rhizotomi, 
but  we  have  no  knowledge  as  to  the  position  of  these  anapaestic 
fragments. 

We  see  then  that  Sophocles  on  the  whole  used  a  simpler  form 
than  Aeschylus.  Two  plays  (Oedipus  Rex  and  Trachiniae), 
like  the  Choephori,  have  parodoi  composed  only  of  lyric  systems. 
The  Ajax  alone  contains  introductory  anapaests  chanted  by 
the  chorus.  In  the  Electra,  one  character  uses  them  before  the 
entrance  of  the  chorus.  They  are  arranged  as  system  and 
antisystem  unlike  the  use  in  P.  V.  88-127.  The  rest  of  the 
parodos  is  a  kommos  in  which  Electra  and  the  chorus  share 
each  strophe  or  antistrophe.  In  the  Antigone,  the  anapaestic 
systems,  inserted  between  the  strophes,  are  also  sung  by  the 
chorus.  This  arrangement  is  found  also  in  the  Philoctetes  and 
the  Oedipus  Coloneus,  but  in  these  plays,  actors  and  chorus 
divide  up  each  section  into  a  regular  dialogue.  These  plays, 
however,  are  from  a  late  period  in  Sophocles'  career. 

Now  let  us  look  at  the  plays  of  Euripides. 


36 


A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 


Cycl    41-81 
Ale.  77-135 


Med.  96-212 


Her.  73-110 


Hipp.  121-169 

And.  117-148 
Hec.  59-215 


41-62 
63-81 
77-85 
86-111 


112-131 

132-135 

96-130 

131-147 

148-159 

173-184 

160-172 

185-203 

204-212 

73-74 

75-110 


121-160 

161-169 

117-146 

59-97 

98-153 

154-215 


strophic  system  with  ephymnia 

epode 

anapaests 

strophic  system   (in  which  93-97 

and  105-111  are  corresponding 

anapaests) 
strophic  system 
anapaests 

anapaests  of  Medea  and  nurse 
anapaests  of  chorus,  nurse,  and 

Medea 

strophic  system 

anapaests  of  Medea  and  nurse 

anapaests  of  nurse 

epode 

iambic  trimeters 

strophic  system  containing  many 
iambic  trimeters  (a  conversation 
between  the  chorus,  lolaos,  and 
the  herald,  the  last  only  in  the 
antistrophe) 

2  strophic  systems 

epode 

2  strophic  systems 

anapaests  of  Hecuba 

anapaests  of  chorus 

strophic  system  and  mesode 

(str.  Hecuba 

mesode  Hecuba  and  Polyxena 

ant.  Polyxena 

The  verses  are  anapaestic  with 
very  free  substitution  of  spon- 
dees, etc.  —  melic  anapaests) 


THE   PARODOS 


37 


Supp.  42-87 
H.  F.  107-137 
Ion  82-237 


Tro.  98-229 


EL  112-212 


/.  T.  123-235 
Hel  164-251 

PAoen.  202-260 

Or.  140-207 
5acc/i.  64-169 


42-87    3  strophic  systems 

107-137  strophic  system 
82-111  anapaests  of  Ion 

112-143  strophic  system  with  ephymnia  of 
Ion 

144-183  melic  anapaests  of  Ion 

184-237  2  strophic  systems  of  chorus   (in 
ant.  2,  Ion  speaks  melic  ana- 
paests   which    have   no    corre- 
sponding lines  in  the  strophe) 
98-152  anapaests  of  Hecuba 

153-196  strophic  system  of  Hecuba  and 
chorus 

197-229  strophic  system  of  chorus 

(a  kommos  of  melic  anapaests) 

112-166  2  strophic  systems  with  mesodes 
of  Electra 

167-212  strophic  system  of  chorus  and 
Electra  (each  section  divided 
between  the  two) 

123-235  melic  anapaests  of  Iphigenia  and 
chorus  (the  metre  is  almost 
spondaic) 

164-166  dactylic  verses  of  Helen 

167-251  two  strophic  systems  and  epode 
(Helen  and  the  chorus  sing  alter- 
nate strophes) 

202-225  strophic  system 

226-238  mesode 

239-260  strophic  system 

140-207  2    strophic   systems    divided    be- 
tween the  chorus  and  Electra 
64-72    proode 
73-134  2  strophic  systems 

135-169  epode 


38  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

7.  A.  1-48, 115-302      1-48   1  anapaestic  prologue  of  Agamem- 
1 15-1 63 J    non  and  servant 
164-302  choral  song,  part  of  which,  at  least, 

is  in  strophic  systems 

Rh.  1-51  1-22    anapaestic  prologue  of  chorus  and 

Hector 

23-33)    .  .    , 

[  strophic  system  of  chorus 
41-51 J 

34-40    anapaests  of  Hector 
Hypsipyle  3(1)  2  strophic"  systems  sung  as  follows: 

str.  and  ant.  1    Hypsipyle 

str.  and  ant.  2   chorus 

The  order  is  —  str.  1,  ant.  1,  str.  2, 

ant.  2 
(The  treatment  is  really  the  same 

as  in  EL  167-212) 
Frag.  773  11.  19-58  (Phaethon)  19-50   2  strophic  systems 

51-58   epode 

Frag.  114  (Andromeda)  This  play  opened  with  anapaests,  as  we 

learn  from  Schol.  Aristoph.   Thesm. 
1065 
Frag.  229  (Archelaus)    This  anapaestic  fragment  may  possibly 

be  from  the  parodos 

Frag.  472  (Cretes)  This  is  apparently  from  the  parodos l 

Frag.  592-594  (Pirithous)  Perhaps  these  are  from  the  parodos 

If  we  group  these  without  separating  parodoi  with  proodes, 
mesodes,  or  epodes,  we  obtain  the  following  results.  Eight 
plays  (Cyclops,  Hippolytus,  Andromache,  Supplices,  Hercules 
Furens,  Phoenissae,  Bacchae,  Phaethon)  have  a  parodos  of  lyric 
metres  only.  One  (Alcestis)  has  anapaests  at  the  beginning 
and  corresponding  anapaests  within  strophe  and  antistrophe. 
One  (Cretes)  apparently  had  anapaests  at  the  beginning.  Two 

1  Cf.  1.  4. 


THE   PARODOS  39 

(Helena,  Hypsipyle)  allow  actor  and  chorus  to  sing  sections 
antiphonally.  Two  (Heraclidae,  Orestes)  have  the  form  of 
conversation.  Two  (Medea,  Rhesus)  have  parodoi  in  which 
both  actors  and  chorus  use  anapaests  and  then  the  chorus 
commences  the  ode,  while  the  actors  continue  anapaests.  One 
(Iphigenia  in  Tauris)  has  a  complete  anapaestic  parodos  in 
which  spondees  are  very  numerous.  One  (Iphigenia  in  Aulide) 
has  an  anapaestic  prologue  but  a  parodos  of  lyric  metres  sung 
by  the  chorus.  Three  (Troades,  Electra,  Ion)  have  as  prelude 
to  the  choral  song,  which  is  variously  treated,  anapaests, 
strophic  system,  or  a  mixture  of  the  two.  Perhaps  the  Andro- 
meda also  belongs  here.  Finally,  one  (Hecuba)  has  anapaests 
chanted  by  an  actor,  a  second  series  by  the  chorus,  and  then 
an  anapaestic  kommos  of  two  actors. 

I  am  well  aware  that  this  takes  a  very  broad  view  of  the 
parodos.  In  the  Hecuba,  we  probably  should  omit  the  kommos 
as  we  did  in  the  Ajax.1  It  seems  to  me  no  mere  coincidence 
that  of  nine  dramas  of  Aeschylus,  in  six  the  parodos  begins  with 
anapaests,  and  that  among  the  twenty-three  of  Euripides,  nine 
have  anapaests  at  the  beginning  or  anapaests  chanted  by  an 
actor  and  one,  a  strophic  system  before  the  entrance  of  the 
chorus.  In  seven  plays,  Sophocles  has  introductory  anapaests 
only  twice:  in  the  Ajax,  where  the  form  of  Aeschylus  is  fol- 
lowed, and  in  the  Electra,  where  an  actor  recites  them.  Since, 
furthermore,  several  of  the  plays  of  Euripides  with  these  ana- 
paests come  from  much  the  same  period,  it  seems  likely  that  the 
methods  of  Aeschylus  were  the  determining  or  at  least  an 
influential  factor.  In  Aeschylus,  the  chorus  might  be  the 
protagonist,  as  in  the  Supplices.  When  later  it  lost  this  rdle, 
it  was  possible  for  an  actor  to  deliver  the  anapaests  or  the 
opening  part  of  the  parodos. 

Although  the  form  seen  in  the  Prometheus  Vinctus  is  not  used 
by  Sophocles,  it  occurs  in  the  Medea  and  the  Rhesus.  Sir  Richard 

1  201  ff. 


40  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

Jebb  l  considers  the  forms  of  the  Prometheus  Vinctus,  Antigone, 
and  Philoctetes  as  closely  akin,  since  the  lyric  parts  are  inter- 
mingled with  anapaestic  systems,  and  he  holds  that  this  form 
is  quite  near  that  of  the  Ajax,  Persae,  etc.  There  is,  however, 
a  striking  difference.  In  the  Prometheus,  there  is  a  dialogue  in 
which  Prometheus  regularly  uses  anapaests  and  the  chorus, 
lyric  strophes.  The  parodos  of  the  Antigone,  on  the  other 
hand,  consists  of  one  song  by  the  chorus,  and  the  intermingling 
seems  more  artificial.  Then,  in  the  Philoctetes  and  the  Oedipus 
Coloneus,  this  form  of  parodos  is  broken  up  into  conversation. 
Decharme 2  assigns  the  use  of  dialogue  by  Sophocles  to  the  influ- 
ence of  Euripides,  and  rightly.  Euripides  did  not  use  the 
Sophoclean  form.  In  the  Alcestis  and  elsewhere,  he  uses  ana- 
paests among  the  strophes,  but  in  the  Alcestis  they  form  part 
of  the  strophe  and  are  accordingly  answered  in  the  antistrophe, 
whereas  Sophocles  inserts  them  as  interludes.  Elsewhere  when 
used,  they  occur  in  dialogue. 

Euripides  also  follows  Aeschylus  in  not  using  a  song  of  the 
whole  chorus.  The  parodos  of  the  Septem  opens  with  a  section 
which  seems  astrophic. 

"It  may  be,  as  many  scholars  from  Hermann  to  Wecklein  have 
thought,  that  the  first  part  is  not  antistrophic,  but  is  sung  by  different 
individuals  in  the  Chorus,  so  as  to  give  a  better  suggestion  of  the 
distraction  and  fright  of  the  women." 3 

The  same  is  true  of  the  Eumenides,  whether  we  accept  as  parodos 
140-177  with  Detscheff 4  or  244-275  with  Sidgwick.5  It  seems 
certain  that  in  the  Alcestis,  Heraclidae,  Supplices,  Ion,  Troades, 
the  songs  also  were  sung  by  various  members  of  the  chorus. 
From  such  an  arrangement,  it  is  but  a  short  step  to  the  method 
used  in  the  Heraclidae  and  Orestes,  where  we  have  real  conver- 

1  Ajax,  p.  31.  2  Euripide  et  Vdsprit  de  son  theatre,  p.  483. 

3  Sidgwick,  Septem  contra  Thebas,  p.  5. 

4  De  tragoediarum  Graecarum  conformatione  scaenica  ac  dramatica,  p.  134. 

5  Eumenides,  p.  19. 


THE   PARODOS  41 

sation.  Apparently  Sophocles  takes  this  liberty  only  in  the 
Oedipus  Coloneus. 

It  is  not  easy  to  assign  various  tendencies  to  various  periods 
in  the  life  of  Euripides.  If  we  disregard  the  prologue  of  the 
Rhesus  as  suspicious,  we  still  have  the  parodoi  of  the  Medea 
and  the  Alcestis  opening  with  anapaests,  and  these  are  from  the 
first  period  of  Euripides'  career.  The  dramas  from  the  end  of 
the  second  period  and  the  beginning  of  the  third  frequently 
contain  anapaestic  sections  recited  or  sung  by  one  of  the  actors 
before  the  entrance  of  the  chorus.  The  dramas  of  the  last 
period  contain  parodoi  of  lyric  metres  only.  The  Iphigenia 
in  Aulide,  it  is  true,  has  an  anapaestic  prologue  —  the  genu- 
ineness of  which  is  often  attacked,  although  it  is  defended 
by  Weil.1 

The  spirit  and  apparent  form  of  the  parodoi  of  Euripides 
differ  widely  from  those  of  Aeschylus.  They  are  less  grand  and 
dignified.  Yet  here  as  elsewhere  Euripides  has  modified  and 
freed  the  devices  of  Aeschylus,  rather  than  those  which  he  could 
have  taken  from  Sophocles. 

2.    The  Cause  of  the  Entrance  of  the  Chorus 

Euripides  also  follows  Aeschylus  in  the  way  in  which  he 
explains  to  the  audience  why  the  chorus  enters.  The  method 
of  Sophocles  is  really  more  artificial,  but  it  is  also  more  artistic. 
I  intend  to  discuss  not  the  deep  psychological  bond  of  union 
between  actor  and  chorus  (as  in  H.  Fries,  De  conexu  chori  per- 
sonae  cum  fabulae  actione)  but  the  mere  external  cause  of  the 
entrance. 

In  the  Supplices  of  Aeschylus,  the  chorus  is  really  the  pro- 
tagonist. It  enters  in  its  endeavor  to  escape  the  sons  of  Aegyp- 
tus.  In  the  Persae,  it  reviews  the  size  of  Xerxes'  forces  and 
seeks  to  speculate  how  he  is  faring.  In  the  Prometheus  Vinctus, 
it  has  heard  the  noise  of  the  binding  of  Prometheus  and  comes 
1  Sept  tragedies  d'Euripide,  p.  309. 


42  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

in  consequence,  and  in  the  Solutus l  it  appears  for  much  the  same 
reason,  a  desire  to  see  the  afflicted  man.  The  chorus  of  the 
Agamemnon  enters  to  learn  the  reason  for  the  unwonted  sacri- 
fices. In  the  Choephori,  it  announces  that  it  is  taking  libations 
to  Agamemnon's  tomb.  In  the  Eumenides,  the  Erinyes  are 
tracking  Orestes.  In  the  Septem,  the  chorus  rushes  to  the  altars 
and  images  of  the  gods.  The  parodos  of  Aeschylus,  then,  usually 
tells  why  the  chorus  has  come. 

Sophocles  is  not  so  precise.  In  the  Antigone,  the  chorus 
heralds  the  approach  of  Creon  in  anapaests 2  and  says  that  it 
has  come  as  he  ordered.  This  is  not  strictly  in  the  parodos. 
Similarly  in  the  Oedipus  Rex,  Electro,,  and  Trachiniae,  it  gives 
no  reason  for  entrance  or  at  least  not  in  the  parodos.  In  the 
Ajax,  it  has  come  to  learn  of  the  truth  of  the  rumors  about 
Ajax,  although  it  does  not  say  so  directly.  In  the  Philoctetes, 
the  position  of  the  chorus  as  the  sailors  of  Neoptolemus'  ship 
renders  its  presence  natural  without  explanation.  In  the 
Oedipus  Coloneus,  it  enters  in  its  search  for  Oedipus.  In  the 
Ichneutae,  Silenus  tells  Apollo  in  iambics,3  before  the  parodos 
begins,  that  he  has  come  with  his  children  in  hopes  of  gaining 
the  reward.  Sophocles,  then,  often  does  not  state  clearly  the 
reason  for  the  appearance  of  the  chorus.  He  has  a  more  artistic 
aim,  but  at  times  the  chorus  does  not  make  any  pretence  of 
having  a  reason  for  its  coming. 

Euripides  in  his  love  for  clearness  of  exposition  returns  to 
the  methods  of  Aeschylus,  —  nay  more,  he  even  renders  them 
more  transparent  than  did  his  predecessor.  In  several  plays, 
as  the  Medea,  the  Troades,  and  the  Helena,  the  chorus  enters 
because  it  has  heard  the  laments  of  some  one  of  the  characters. 
In  another,  the  Andromache,  it  comes  to  sympathize  and  make 
peace.  In  the  Alcestis,  the  Hippolytus,  the  Orestes,  and  the 
Hypsipyle,  it  enters  with  a  desire  to  obtain  definite  knowledge, 
and  we  may  perhaps  place  here  the  Heraclidae,  in  which  it 
1  Frag.  190.  2  155-161.  3  39  ff. 


THE   PARODOS  43 

wishes  to  learn  the  cause  of  the  tumult.  In  the  Hecuba  and  the 
Rhesus,  it  comes  with  information  for  an  actor.  In  the  Supplices, 
it  of  course  is  presenting  its  petition  to  Aethra.  In  the  Iphi- 
genia  in  Aulide,  it  is  merely  sight-seeing.  In  the  Electra,  it 
brings  an  invitation  to  Electra  to  attend  a  religious  service.  In 
the  Ion,  it  has  accompanied  its  mistress,  Creusa.  In  the  Iphi- 
genia  in  Tauris,  it  comes  in  response  to  a  summons  from  Iphi- 
genia.  In  the  Phaethon,  it  is  to  sing  at  the  wedding.1  In  the 
Bacchae,  it  accompanies  Dionysus.  In  the  Cyclops,  it  cares 
for  the  herds  of  the  Cyclops.  In  the  Hercules  Furens,  in  vague 
words,  it  says  that  it  has  come  to  sympathize  with  Amphitryon, 
and  in  the  Phoenissae  it  tells  how  it  came  to  Thebes.  We  may 
notice  that  in  all  but  the  Cyclops,  Alcestis,  Heraclidae,  Hip- 
polytus,  Hercules  Furens,  Ion,  Phoenissae,  Orestes,  and  Hyp- 
sipyle,  it  definitely  explains  why  it  has  come,  and  even  of  these 
exceptions,  in  all  except  the  Cyclops,  Hypsipyle,  and  Phoenissae, 
the  reason  for  its  appearance  is  more  or  less  clearly  indicated. 

In  the  dramas  of  Euripides,  the  reason  advanced  for  the 
entry  of  the  chorus  may  be  of  the  most  unsubstantial  and  chance 
character  possible,  but  it  is  given.  Aeschylus,  because  of  the 
importance  of  the  chorus,  often  gave  a  real  motive  for  its  ap- 
pearance. Still  the  methods  of  Euripides  are  a  development 
of  the  usage  of  Aeschylus,  not  of  that  of  Sophocles,  whom  he 
perhaps  influenced  in  the  Oedipus  Coloneus, 
1  Frag.  773,  1.  44  ff. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  IAMBIC  SPEECHES  OF  THE  CHORUS 

ALTHOUGH  in  many  ways  Euripides  reduces  the  importance 
of  the  chorus  in  his  plays,  yet  in  one  particular  he  revives  some 
of  its  former  dignity  by  making  it  express  clearer  judgments 
upon  the  actors  and  the  actions  than  it  does  in  the  plays  of 
Sophocles.  It  is  less  apt  to  be  strictly  neutral  and  purely 
conventional  in  its  utterances  at  the  end  of  the  long  speeches 
of  the  actors.  Fries  1  has  shown  that  Euripides  connects  the 
chorus  with  the  position  of  one  of  the  actors  more  closely 
than  Sophocles,  but  he  has  dealt  for  the  most  part  with  the 
choral  songs.  We  shall  here  consider  the  short  iambic  speeches 
which  are  often  only  one  or  two  lines  in  length. 

As  Fries  well  emphasizes,  in  some  of  the  plays  of  Aeschylus 
the  chorus  is  one  of  the  protagonists.  So  in  the  Supplices  and 
the  Eumenides,  we  can  hardly  conceive  of  it  as  a  formal  de- 
liverer of  colorless  opinions.  Not  merely  in  the  choral  odes 
but  throughout  it  stands  forth  as  the  champion  of  a  definite 
position.  In  the  Persae,  the  chorus  is  vitally  interested  in  the 
fate  of  Xerxes  and  tells  Atossa  that  it  is  a  body  of  friendly  coun- 
sellors.2 Such  passages  then  as  787  ff.  are  not  merely  conven- 
tional requests  for  information  to  satisfy  the  spectators,  but 
they  are  questions  of  supreme  importance  to  the  chorus  as  well 
as  to  Atossa.  In  the  Septem  the  chorus  is  on  the  side  of  Thebes 
and  advises  Eteocles  not  to  meet  his  brother  in  battle.3  In  the 
Prometheus,  it  suffers  at  the  end  with  Prometheus.  It  wishes 
to  hear  lo's  story.4  In  the  Agamemnon  the  long  threnos  and  the 

1  De  conexu  chori  personae  cum  fabulae  actione. 

2  175.  3  712  ff.  «  819  ff. 


THE  IAMBIC  SPEECHES  OF  THE  CHORUS          45 

quarrel  with  Aegisthus1  show  that  the  chorus  takes  a  definite 
stand  on  the  questions  at  issue.  In  the  Choephori  its  position 
is  not  doubtful,  for  it  persuades  the  nurse  to  fetch  Aegisthus 
without  his  bodyguard.2  In  the  plays  of  Aeschylus,  in  the  dia- 
logue portions  as  well  as  in  the  odes,  the  chorus  is  not  neutral 
but  is  a  helper  or  a  very  sympathetic  adviser  to  the  actors. 
In  most  of  the  plays,  it  expresses  judgments  of  which  the  spec- 
tators approve. 

In  the  plays  of  Sophocles,  the  chorus  is  less  active.  In  the 
Antigone,  for  instance,  it  advises  Creon  to  yield  to  Tiresias3 
but  it  previously  has  submitted  to  the  ruler  and  in  several 
passages,  as  471-472,  it  merely  states  facts  without  comment- 
ing upon  them.  In  the  stormy  scene  between  Creon  and 
Haemon,  it  lacks  a  definite  position  and  says: 


ava£,  ak  T'  euc6s,  et  n  Kaipiov 

,  ak.  TJ  av  rovd''  fv  yap  elprjTai 


In  the  Ajax,  the  chorus  composed  of  Salaminian  sailors  is  closely 
related  to  Ajax  and  is  imperilled  by  his  fall.5  Yet  it  tries  to 
moderate  the  anger  of  its  chief  6  and  during  the  dispute  concern- 
ing the  funeral  to  restrain  the  participants,  Menelaus,7  Teucer,8 
Agamemnon.9  In  the  Oedipus  Rex,  the  chorus  continues  the 
same  policy.  It  leaves  the  discovery  of  the  criminal  to  the 
.  god  w  and  attempts  to  calm  Oedipus  in  the  scene  with  Tiresias  u 
and  to  prevent  trouble  with  Creon.12  Here  as  in  the  Antigone 
the  chorus  has  little  personal  connection  with  the  protagonist. 
The  same  tendency  appears  in  the  Electra,  where  the  chorus 
urges  moderation  on  Electra.13  In  the  Trachiniae  also  the  chorus 
fails  to  express  any  decided  views.  In  the  Philoctetes,  as  in  the 
Ajax,  the  chorus  is  formed  of  sailors  subject  to  one  of  the 

1407  ff.  •  481  ff.  10  276  ff. 

730  ff  .  7  1091-1092.  "  404  ff. 

1100-1101.  '1118-1119.  »523ff. 

724-725.  •  1264-1265.  »  610-611,  1015-1016. 

900  ff. 


46  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

actors,  yet  it  contents  itself  with  platitudes,  as  in  its  remark 
to  Odysseus: 

ftapvs  rt  Kai  fiapelav  6  £evo$  (franv 

rrivd'  C'TT',    '08v<r<rev,  KOVX  virt'iKovaav  /coucoij.1 

The  Oedipus  Coloneus  differs  from  the  other  Sophoclean  trage- 
dies extant  in  this  point.  The  chorus  takes  a  firmer  stand  on 
various  occasions.  It  declares  boldly  in  answer  to  Oedipus' 
appeal  for  help: 

Oapvet,  irapkarai'  Kai  yap  d  yepcw  eyw, 
r6  rfjffSe  x&pas  °v  yeyhpaKe  crdkvos.2 


It  threatens  Creon  and  challenges  him:  kirlax^  avrov,  ^et^e,3 
and  later  condemns  Polynices  and  urges  him  to  leave  as  quickly 
as  possible.4  It  proves  that  it  spoke  the  truth  in  461  ff.,  when 
it  declared  that  as  Oedipus  was  to  help  Athens,  it  would  assist 
him.  In  the  Ichneutae,  the  chorus  is  very  important,  as  a  consid- 
erable part  of  the  extant  portion  is  a  dialogue  between  Cyllene 
and  the  Satyrs,  and  the  latter  as  the  agents  of  Apollo  almost 
become  one  of  the  protagonists  of  the  play.  As  far  then  as  we 
can  judge  from  the  extant  plays,  Sophocles  uses  the  speeches 
of  the  chorus  in  a  rather  colorless  manner.  The  exceptions  are 
the  Oedipus  Coloneus,  the  structure  of  which  has  been  influ- 
enced by  the  plays  of  Euripides,  and  the  Ichneutae,  which  is 
probably  the  oldest  satyric  drama  extant  and  the  earliest 
play  of  Sophocles  which  has  been  preserved. 

Euripides  follows  Aeschylus  in  making  the  chorus  express 
its  opinions  more  boldly,  although  the  extent  to  which  this  is 
true  varies  in  different  plays.  In  the  Bacchae,  it  is  vitally  in- 
terested in  the  defeat  of  Pentheus  and  censures  him  at  every 
turn.  It  condemns  the  king  as  impious  for  his  treatment  of 
Cadmus  and  Tiresias,5  it  greets  the  escaping  Dionysus,6 

1  1045-1046.  3  856.  B  263-265. 

1  726-727.  4  1397-1398.  «  608-609. 


THE  IAMBIC  SPEECHES  OF  THE  CHORUS          47 

in  spite  of  its  fear  of  the  ruler,  it  confesses  the  power  of  the 
god,1  and  it  triumphs  at  the  news  of  the  tyrant's  death.2  In 
the  Supplices,  the  chorus,  composed  of  the  mothers  of  the  dead 
chieftains,  would  naturally  not  be  neutral.  It  supplements 
the  pleas  of  Adrastus,3  it  commends  Aethra's  intervention,4 
it  rebukes  the  herald,5  and  rejoices  over  the  Athenian  victory.6 
In  the  Troades,  the  chorus  of  captive  Trojan  women  utters 
many  gnomic  sayings,  as  608--609,  or  speeches  referring  to  its 
own  lot,  as  684-685,  but  it  appeals  to  Hecuba  to  answer  Helen : 

/ScuriXet',   afj.vvov  cms  reKVoiai  K.a.1  irarpq. 
8ia.(f>8dpovaa  rrja-8',  lird  X&yci 
Ka/coOp7os  ova  a.'  deivdv  ovv  r68e.7 

Similarly  it  appeals  to  Menelaus  to  destroy  Helen,  who  has 
disgraced  her  sex.8  In  the  Ion,  the  chorus,  composed  of  the 
maids  of  Creusa,  is  deeply  attached  to  its  mistress  and  con- 
demns the  action  of  Xuthus.  It  wishes  the  prosperity  of  the 
queen,9  it  rejoices  that  Ion  wishes  to  stay  at  Delphi,10  it  tells 
the  oracle  in  defiance  of  Xuthus'  orders,11  and  it  wishes  to 
share  the  queen's  fate,  whatever  it  may  be.12  In  the  Heraclidae, 
the  chorus  of  Athenians  does  not  waver  in  its  views.  Without 
assenting  to  the  speech  of  the  herald,13  it  approves  that  of  lolaus 
and  urges  the  reception  of  the  suppliants,14  it  refuses  to  allow 
the  surrender  of  lolaus,15  and  it  opposes  the  murder  of  Eurys- 
theus.16  Indeed  it  represents  the  point  of  view  of  the  Athenians 
and  so  is  not  neutral.  In  the  Medea,  the  chorus  has  a  definite 
opinion.  It  tells  Medea  that  she  is  acting  rightly  17  and  says  to 
Jason  that  he  is  doing  wrong.18  It  urges  Medea  not  to  kill  her 
children 19  and  again  condemns  Jason.20  In  the  Hercules  Furens, 

775-777.  »  1033-1035.  «  461-463. 

1031  ff.  •  566-568.  »  961  ff. 

193-194, 250-252.  10  648-649.  "  267-268. 

332-333.  "  760  ff.  »  576-578. 

511-512.  u  857-858.  19  811-813. 

731-733,  »  179-180.  *  1231-1235. 

7  966-968.  "  232-235. 


48  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

the  chorus  is  unreservedly  on  the  side  of  Heracles,  it  dis- 
cusses whether  or  not  it  can  defend  the  victims  of  Lycus,1  and 
later  it  blames  Hera  for  the  madness  of  Heracles.2  In  the 
Iphigenia  in  Tauris,  many  of  the  speeches  are  colorless,  but 
the  chorus  promises  to  help  Iphigenia 3  and  attempts  to  delay 
the  messenger  who  is  reporting  the  escape  to  Thoas.4  The  chorus 
in  the  Phoenissae,  although  composed  of  strangers  at  Thebes, 
does  not  hesitate  to  have  an  opinion  as  to  the  merits  of  the 
brothers.  It  praises  Polynices,5  condemns  Eteocles,6  and 
prays  for  a  reconciliation.7  In  the  Orestes,  in  addition  to  gnomic 
sayings,  as  542-543,  the  chorus  formally  asks  Menelaus  to 
help  Orestes.8  It  condemns  Helen  9  and  assists  Electra  in  her 
watch  for  enemies.10  In  the  Helena,  the  chorus  is  friendly  to 
Helen  and  advises  her  to  consult  Theonoe  n  instead  of  believing 
Teucer.12  In  naive  fashion  it  wishes  to  hear  the  plea  of  Mene- 
laus, 13  as  the  chorus  in  the  Prometheus  desire  to  learn  about 
lo's  wanderings.14  The  chorus  of  the  Hippolytus  is  not  very 
decided  in  its  views,  but  it  approves  of  Phaedra's  plan  rather 
than  the  nurse's,15  and  later  because  of  its  oath  it  does  not  tell 
of  the  innocence  of  Hippolytus.  In  the  Iphigenia  in  Aulide, 
the  chorus  throughout  is  opposed  to  the  sacrifice  of  the  maiden 
and  pities  Agamemnon  16  and  Iphigenia.17  It  clearly  condemns 
the  sacrifice,  although  it  approves  Iphigenia's  decision  to  die 
willingly.18  In  the  Cyclops,  the  chorus  of  Satyrs  constantly  seeks 
to  escape  from  the  Cyclops  19  and  so  it  naturally  sides  with 
Odysseus,  and  even  takes  his  part  against  Silenus.20  It  is 
willing  to  assist  in  the  blinding  of  the  monster  but  it  always 
loses  its  courage  and  excuses  its  inactivity.21 

252  ff.,  312-315.  •  680-681.  "482-485. 

1311-1312.  9  1153-1154.  1J  469-470. 

1075-1077.  10  1246  ff.  17  1336-1337. 

1288  ff .  »  317  ff.  18  1402-1403. 

497-498.  *  306-307.  »  437  ff. 

526-527.  1J  944-946.  20  270-272. 

7  586-587.  14  819  ff.  21  629  ff. 


THE   IAMBIC   SPEECHES   OF  THE   CHORUS  49 

In  other  plays,  however,  the  chorus  does  not  take  so  decided 
a  position.  In  the  Alcestis,  for  instance,  the  chorus  praises 
Alcestis  in  such  frigid  terms  that  the  depairawa  becomes  indig- 
nant.1 The  same  calm  character  is  seen  in  326-327  and  the 
scene  between  Pheres  and  Admetus.2  It  is  surprised  at  the 
reception  of  Heracles  by  Admetus.3  In  the  Andromache,  the 
chorus  is  very  frigid.  In  the  scene  between  Peleus  and  Mene- 
laus,  it  urges  moderation  4  much  in  the  Sophoclean  fashion.  It 
reveals  to  Peleus  the  plot  of  Orestes  5  but  on  the  whole  its  func- 
tion is  rather  slight.  Although  the  chorus  of  the  Hecuba  is 
composed  of  captive  Trojan  women,  most  of  their  remarks 
are  formal,  as  in  the  scene  between  Odysseus  and  Hecuba.6 
In  the  Electra,  the  chorus  is  quite  neutral.  In  some  passages, 
as  401^403,  it  sympathizes  with  Electra,  but  its  comments 7  on 
Clytaemestra's  speech  are  a  good  illustration  of  the  gnomic 
and  formal  attitude  which  it  assumes.  In  the  Rhesus,  too,  the 
chorus  does  little  more  than  present  formal  comments  on  the 
action,  as  in  804  ff.,  where  it  briefly  sums  up  the  situation  and 
shows  the  innocence  of  Hector. 

Unlike  Sophocles,  then,  Euripides  often  connects  his  chorus 
in  some  degree  with  one  of  the  actors  throughout  the  play.  It 
takes  a  definite  stand  and  often  tends  to  express  the  poet's 
view  of  the  true  ethical  import  of  the  drama.  Prof.  Murray  8 
says  of  the  chorus : 

"It  also  carries  on,  by  the  mouth  of  its  Leader,  a  certain  amount 
of  ordinary  dialogue  with  the  actors.  Its  work  here  is  generally  kept 
unobtrusive,  neutral  and  low-toned.  When  a  traveller  wants  to  ask 
his  way;  when  the  hero  or  heroine  announces  some  resolve,  or  gives 
some  direction,  the  Leader  is  there  to  make  the  necessary  response. 
But  only  within  certain  carefully  guarded  limits.  The  Leader  must 
never  become  a  definite  full-blooded  character  with  strongly  personal 

1  150  ff.  •  1047  ff. 

*  611-740.  •  296-298. 

»  551 ff.  7  1051-1054. 

4  642-644,  691-692,  727-728.  •  Euripides  and  his  Age,  p.  235  f. 


50  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

views.  He  must  never  take  really  effective  or  violent  action.  He 
never,  I  think,  gives  information  which  we  do  not  already  possess  or 
expresses  views  which  could  seem  paradoxical  or  original.  He  is  an 
echo,  a  sort  of  music  in  the  air.  ...  At  times,  in  these  dialogue  scenes, 
an  effect  is  obtained  by  allowing  the  Chorus  to  turn  for  a  moment  into 
ordinary  flesh  and  blood." 

This  is  true  in  the  main,  but  Euripides'  choruses  very  often  ex- 
press a  definite  opinion  as  to  the  justice  of  one  or  more  of  the 
most  prominent  characters  in  the  play. 

Herein  Euripides  has  followed  the  usage  of  Aeschylus,  in 
whose  plays  the  chorus  is  usually  connected  with  the  actors. 
Sophocles  diminishes  the  function  of  the  chorus  until  it  inter- 
feres in  the  dialogue  in  a  colorless  way,  and  in  the  desire  to 
keep  it  neutral  he  neglects  any  relationship  which  it  may  have 
with  one  of  the  characters.  Euripides,  who  revives  the  older 
method,  develops  all  means  of  connecting  the  chorus  and  the 
characters  and  also  indicates,  through  the  iambic  speeches  of 
the  coryphaeus,  his  own  attitude  toward  the  moral  problems 
underlying  the  play.  It  is  true  that  such  iambic  speeches 
are  more  frequent  in  the  dramas  of  Euripides  than  in  those 
of  Aeschylus,  since  the  latter  uses  the  lyric  metres  more 
extensively,  but  it  is  clear  that  in  his  use  of  such  speeches,  the 
model  of  Euripides  was  not  Sophocles  but  Aeschylus. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  ANAPAEST 

IN  chapter  III,  we  have  seen  some  similarities  in  the  use 
of  the  anapaest  by  Aeschylus  and  Euripides.  Let  us  see  now 
if  in  other  ways  also  the  two  poets  agree  in  their  use  of  this 
metre. 

Prof.  Smyth,1  in  a  classification  of  the  occurrences  of  this 
metre,  arranges  the  examples  as  (1)  anapaests  of  parodos  and 
march;  (2)  semimelic  anapaests;  (3)  melic  anapaests.  The 
third  division  consists  usually  of  short  sections  of  one  or  two 
lines,  generally  part  of  a  strophe,  although  in  the  plays  of 
Euripides  we  do  find  long  passages  in  this  metre.  This  class, 
from  its  association  with  other  metres  and  its  incorporation 
in  odes,  concerns  us  less  intimately  and  we  shall  mention  only 
some  of  the  more  striking  cases  of  it.  In  my  grouping,  I  shall 
follow  in  general  Prof.  Smyth's  divisions,  but  I  shall  not  men- 
tion the  passages  which  I  have  treated  in  chapter  III. 

1.  (a)  Anapaests  at  entrance  of  character  —  Pers.  150-154 
(of  Atossa),  909-921  (spoken  by  Xerxes  and  the  chorus),  Sept. 
861-874  (of  Antigone  and  Ismene),  P.  V.  286-299  (spoken  by 
Oceanus),  561-565  (spoken  by  lo),  Ag. 782-809 (of  Agamemnon). 

(6)  Anapaests  at  end  of  episode  or  as  prelude  to  stasimon— 
Supp.  625-629,  Pers.  532-547,  623-632,  Sept.  822-831,  P.  V. 
279-285,  Ag.  355-366,  Bum.  307-320. 

(c)  Anapaests  at  departure  of  character  —  P.  V.  877-886 
(spoken  by  lo),  Ag.  1331-1342  (of  Cassandra),  Ch.  855-868  (of 
Aegisthus). 

1  Notes  on  the  Anapaests  of  Aischylos,  Harvard  Studies,  Vol.  VII,  p. 139. 


52  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

(d)  Anapaests  at  ending  of  play  —  Sept .  1059-1084,  P.  V. 
1040-1093,  Ch.  1065-1076. 

(e)  Miscellaneous  anapaests   (interludes)  —  Supp.  966-979, 
Ch.  719-729. 

2.  Semimelic  anapaests  —  threnoi  and  anapaestic  systems 
mixed  with  lyric  passages  —  Ag.  1448-1576  (1462-1467,  1475- 
1480, 1497-1504, 1523-1529, 1551-1559, 1567-1576, the  speeches 
of  Clytaemestra  in  kommos),  Ch.  306-479  (306-314,  340-344, 
372-379,  400-404,  476^78,  speeches  of  the  chorus  in  threnos), 
Eum.  916-1020   (927-937,  949-955,  968-975,  988-995,  1003- 
1013,  the  speeches  of  Athena). 

3.  Melic  anapaests  —  Pers.   694-696  =  700-702,  Ch.  1007- 
1009  =  1018-1020. 

Sophocles  uses  the  anapaest  less  extensively. 

1.  (a)  Ant.    155-161    (of   Creon),   376-383    (of   Antigone), 
526-530    (of   Ismene),    626-630    (of   Haemon),    800-805    (of 
Antigone),  1257-1260  (of  Creon),  Phil.  1409-1417  (spoken  by 
Heracles). 

(6)   No  examples. 

(c)  Ant.  929-943  (spoken  by  chorus,  Creon,  and  Antigone). 

(d)  Ant.    1347-1353,    Aj.    1402-1420,    Tr.    1259-1278,    El. 
1508-1510,  Phil.  1445-1471,  0.  C.  1751-1779  (the  first  three 
passages  contain  reflections  on  the  action  of  the  plays). 

(e)  Aj.  1163-1167. 

2.  Ant.  806-882  (817-822,  834-838,  speeches  of  chorus),  Aj. 
201-262  (201-220,  speeches  of  Tecmessa  and  chorus,  233-244, 
257-262,  the  speeches  of  Tecmessa),  Tr.  971-1042  (971-1003, 
speeches  of  Hyllus,  old  man,  and  Heracles),  0.  R.  1297-1368 
(1297-1312,  speeches  of  chorus  and  Oedipus). 

This  shows  the  relative  unimportance  of  the  anapaest  in 
Sophocles'  plays.  At  the  conclusion  of  a  drama,  it  is  often 
used  to  express  a  moralizing  comment.  In  the  semimelic  pas- 
sages, it  is  retained,  but  even  here  the  proportion  of  anapaest 
to  lyric  is  much  smaller  than  in  the  work  of  Aeschylus.  Only 


THE   ANAPAEST  53 

in  the  Antigone  is  the  entrance  of  characters  often  heralded  in 
this  metre.  In  these  cases,  there  is  a  loss  in  content  as  well  as 
length,  since  the  treatment  is  rather  formal,  a  mere  announce- 
ment and  a  simple  comment  upon  the  character  entering. 

Now  let  us  consider  the  usage  of  Euripides. 

1.  (a)  Ale.  28-37  (spoken  by  Thanatos),  238-243  (of  Ad- 
metus  and  Alcestis),  Hipp.  170-266  (170-175  of  nurse,  176-266 
spoken  by  nurse  and  Phaedra),  1282-1295  (spoken  by  Artemis), 
1342-1369  (spoken  by  chorus  and  Hippolytus),  And.  494-500 
(of  Andromache),  1166-1172  (of  the  body  of  Neoptolemus), 
1226-1230  (of  Thetis),  Supp.  794-797  (of  the  bodies  of  the  slain 
chiefs),  980-989  (of  Evadne),  1114-1122  (of  the  children  with 
the  bones  of  the  chiefs),  H.  F.  442-450  (of  Amphitryon  and 
Megara),  Ion  1244-1249  (of  Creusa),  Tro.  230-234  (of  Tal- 
thybius),  568-576  (of  Andromache),  1118-1122  (of  the  body  of 
Astyanax),  1251-1259  (of  the  burning  of  Troy),  El.  988-997 
(of  Clytaemestra),  1172-1176  (of  the  matricides),  1233-1237 
(of  the  Dioscuri),  I.  T.  456-466  (of  the  captive  Orestes  and 
Pylades),  Phoen.  1480-1484  (of  the  bodies  of  the  brothers), 
Or.  348-355  (of  Menelaus),  1013-1017  (of  Pylades),  /.  A. 
590-606  (of  Clytaemestra),  Rh.  379-387  (of  Rhesus),  882-889 
(of  the  Muse),  Hyps,  iv,  5(3)10-14  (of  Amphiaraus),  frag. 
773  (Phaethori),  11.  59-65  (of  the  king,  herald,  and  Phaethon). 

(6)  Cycl.  483-494. 

(c)  Ale.  741-746  (of  the  funeral),  Med.  357-363  (of  Creon), 
759-763  (of  Aegeus),  Tro.  782-798  (spoken  by  Talthybius  and 
Hecuba). 

(d)  Her.  1053-1055,  Hipp.  1462-1466,  Hec.  1293-1295,  Supp. 
1232-1234,  H.  F.  1427-1428,  El.  1292-1359,  7.  A.  1627-1629, 
Rh.  993-996,  frag.  446  (Hippolytus).     Ending  A  —  Ale.  1159- 
1163,  Med.  1389-1419  (1415-1419,  ending,  except  1415),  And. 
1284-1288,   Hel.    1688-1692,   Bacch.    1368-1392    (1388-1392, 
ending).     Ending  B  — 7.   T.  1490-1499   (1497-1499,  ending), 
Phoen.  1764-1766,  Or.  1682-1693  (1691-1693,  ending). 


54  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN  EURIPIDES 

(e)  Med.  1081-1115,  Her.  288-296. 

2.  Ale.  244-279   (273-279,  speech  of  Admetus  in  threnos), 
861-934    (861-871,  878-888,   895-902,  912-925,  the  speeches 
of  Admetus  hi  threnos). 

3.  Hipp.  1370-1378   (of  Hippolytus),  And.  501-544   (515- 
522  =  537-544   of  Menelaus),  Hec.  154-215   (of  Hecuba  and 
Polyxena),  Ion  859-922  (monologue  of  Creusa),  Rh.  527-564 
(538-545  =  557-564). 

Euripides  uses  the  anapaest  more  than  Sophocles  does,  and 
he  employs  it  at  times  in  a  more  formal  manner.  This  is  es- 
pecially seen  in  the  conventional  endings  which  are  repeated 
at  the  conclusion  of  several  plays.  The  use  of  such  general 
schemes  in  eight  out  of  nineteen  plays  seems  to  show  a  loss  of 
spontaneity,  but  it  is  possible  that  Euripides  did  not  write 
them.  The  poet  uses  freely  lyric  anapaests,  often  modified  and 
admitting  many  substitutions. 

In  the  anapaests  employed  at  the  entrance  of  characters, 
Euripides  follows  the  tradition  of  Aeschylus.  The  dramatic 
power  of  this  use  can  be  seen  in  Ag.  782-809  and  P.  V.  561-565, 
examples  of  a  speech  by  the  chorus  and  of  one  by  the  entering 
actor.  Sophocles  treats  such  anapaests  in  a  colorless  way.1 
Ant.  376-383  is  the  only  passage  in  which  the  chorus  addresses 
the  person  entering.  Although  Euripides  uses  the  metre  here 
at  times  in  a  manner  similar  to  that  of  Sophocles,  he  often  em- 
ploys it  as  in  El.  988-997,  where  the  greeting  of  the  queen  is 
on  a  splendid  scale,  and  in  Tro.  568-576,  where  there  is  a  strik- 
ing description  of  Andromache  on  her  way  to  the  ship.  In 
several  passages,2  the  chorus  addresses  the  actor  entering,  and 
in  others,8  it  addresses  some  character  or  characters  already 
on  the  stage.  I.  A.  590-606  is  similar  in  type  to  Pers.  150-154, 
although  the  latter  case  seems  more  like  an  actual  address. 

1  Cf.  Ant.  626-630. 

*  And.  494-500,  Tro.  568-576,  El.  988-997,  Or.  348-355,  Rh.  379-387. 

*  Tro.  1118-1122,  1251-1259,  I.  T.  456-466,  Rh.  882-889. 


THE   ANAPAEST  55 

Finally  in  Hyps,  iv,  5(3)10-14,  the  chorus  appeals  to  Zeus  of 
Nemea  for  information  concerning  the  approaching  stranger. 
Even  where  there  is  no  address  of  one  of  the  actors,  Euripides 
is  apt  to  give  more  information  and  show  more  variety  in  form 
than  Sophocles.  A  comparison  of  And.  1226-1230  and  Ant. 
526-530  shows  this.  Aeschylus  avoids  formalism  on  the  whole, 
even  when  the  chorus  delivers  the  passage  as  in  Ag.  782-809. 

It  is  especially  in  the  anapaests  at  the  entrance  of  characters 
that  Euripides  follows  the  usage  of  Aeschylus,  and  it  is  here 
that  he  differs  most  markedly  from  Sophocles.  Semimelic 
passages  the  two  later  poets  treat  in  rather  similar  fashion, 
but  Euripides  develops  and  uses  melic  anapaests  more  freely. 
Finally  at  the  end  of  plays  Euripides  carries  on  the  change 
commenced  in  the  dramas  of  Sophocles  and  employs  more  formal 
schemes  than  either  Sophocles  or  Aeschylus.  The  latter,  in 
fact,  avoids  any  such  moralizings  at  the  conclusion  of  a  piece. 

Euripides  uses  the  anapaests  most  frequently  in  the  earlier 
plays,  but  toward  the  end  of  the  third  period,  he  largely  dis- 
cards them.  The  metrical  variety  thus  lost  he  regains  through 
the  revival  of  the  trochaic  tetrameter. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  TROCHAIC   TETRAMETER 

UNLIKE  the  anapaest,  the  trochaic  tetrameter  passed  almost 
out  of  use  in  the  later  stages  of  Aeschylus'  career,  and  later, 
after  a  long  period  of  neglect,  it  reappeared.  Euripides  revived 
it  in  the  second  period  of  his  work  and  used  it  ever  more  freely. 
Sophocles  never  cared  for  it,  or  at  least  he  employed  it  very 
sparingly. 

Kanz  l  thinks  that  Euripides  used  this  metre  for  two  pur- 
poses: (1)  to  give  a  dignified  account  of  serious  matters;  (2)  in 
altercations  which  the  lively  movement  of  the  metre  suited. 
Prof.  Verrall 2  says  that  Bacch.  604-641  (trochaic  lines)  shows 
the  influence  of  comedy  and  indicates  that  we  are  not  to  treat 
Dionysus  seriously.  Kanz,  however,  places  this  same  passage 
in  his  first  class. 

Aristotle3  says  of  tragedy:  kit  IUKP&V  nvQwv  na.1  Xe^cws  ye\oias 
8ia  TO  €K  <ra.Tvpi.Kov  /iera/SaXeTj'  6iJ/e  airecrenvvvQr),  TO  re  ukrpov  £K  rcrpa- 
/xerpou  ianfieiov  kytveTO-  TO  fj.ev  yap  irpuiTov  T€rpa/xerpc«)  kxp&VTO  5ta 
TO  (raTvpiKriv  /ecu  opx^ori/ccoTCpaj'  elvai  TTJV  iroiriaiv,  Xe£ecos  ot  ytvo- 
fj.evr)S  avTrj  rj  </>i/cris  TO  oiKciov  neTpov  evpe  /ia,Xt(TTa  yap  XCKTIKOV  T&V 
lj.€Tpuv  TO  la/jLpeiov  kaTiv.  This  seems  to  be  a  reliable  statement. 
Whatever  the  origin  of  tragedy,  the  trochaic  was  probably  the 
metre  first  used,  and  it  seems  certain  that  tragedy  was  originally 
of  religious  origin  and  that  deities  appeared  on  the  stage. 

Although  the  trochaic  seems  more  rapid  than  the  iambic 
and  is  less  often  used  for  long  speeches,  still  in  the  Iphigenia 
in  Aulide  there  are  trochaic  speeches  of  42  lines  4  and  24  lines,6 

1  De  tetrametro  trochaico,  p.  25.  3  Poetics,  p.  1449  a  19  ff. 

*  Bacchants  of  Euripides,  p.  76.  4  334-375.         *  378-401. 


THE  TROCHAIC  TETRAMETER  57 

respectively.  The  poets,  then,  could  use  long  trochaic  speeches. 
Conversely,  in  the  Ion,  in  which  this  metre  is  used  consider- 
ably, there  are  an  iambic  stichomythy  of  105  lines1  and  another 
of  91  lines.2  Trochaics,  then,  are  not  always  used  in  scenes 
with  rapid  movement. 

The  trochaics  in  the  Persae,  the  earliest  play  in  which  they 
occur,  are  arranged  in  an  interesting  manner.  The  first  passage 
in  which  they  are  found3  contains  also  a  long  iambic  speech  by 
Atossa.4  This  might  seem  to  indicate  that  trochaics  were  not 
used  for  long  speeches.  It  is  more  significant,  however,  that 
this  iambic  section  describes  the  dream  and  the  portents  seen 
by  the  queen.  When  she  speaks  with  the  chorus  as  a  mortal, 
she  uses  trochaics,  but  when  she  reveals  the  will  of  the  gods, 
she  employs  iambics. 

The  second  scene  6  can  be  explained  in  the  same  way.  In 
681-693,  Darius,  a  prince  among  the  dead,  appears  in  response 
to  the  rites  of  Atossa  and  the  chorus.  He  uses  iambics.  The 
chorus,  filled  with  awe,  says: 


niv  7rpocri5ecr0eu, 
8'  avrLa  Xe£cu. 
akd€v  dpxauf)  irtpl  rap/Set.6 


He  turns  to  the  chorus  and  in  trochaics  asks  it  to  speak  rfiv 
k^v  ai8u  ne8ds.7  He  then  appeals  to  the  queen  and  learns  from 
her  of  the  disastrous  expedition  of  Xerxes.8  During  this  tro- 
chaic passage,  the  ghost  is  learning  about  the  conditions  of  his 
realm  and  seemingly  knows  nothing  of  what  has  happened  since 
his  death.  At  759,  he  changes  back  to  iambics,  repeats  the 
history  of  the  Persian  kings,  and,  foretelling  the  future,  warns 
against  another  expedition  to  Greece  and  departs.  Darius  uses 
trochaics  while  he  is  seeking  information,  i.e.  while  he  is  a  dead 
mortal.  When  he  assumes  the  rdle  of  divine  prophet  and 

1  264-368.  •  155-248.  «  681-851.  7  699. 

*  938-1028.  4  176-214.  •  694-696.  •  703-758. 


58  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

preacher,  —  i.e.,  is  the  hero  or  god,  —  he  uses  iambics.  At  the 
end  of  the  scene1  Atossa  and  the  chorus  also  speak  in  iambics. 
This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  Darius  is  the  protagonist  and  to  the 
poet's  reluctance  to  change  the  metre  for  the  few  lines.  We  do 
not  find  anywhere  a  conversation  in  which  both  iambics  and 
trochaics  are  simultaneously  used. 

In  the  Agamemnon,  the  trochaic  lines  1344,  1346,  1347, 
may  be  regarded  as  expressing  strong  feeling  or  as  revealing 
something  which  takes  place  off  the  stage.  Probably  they  are 
used  to  emphasize  1343,  1345,  the  cries  of  the  stricken  king. 
Later,  when  the  chorus  says, 


rl  dri  TOV  iivdpa  rovd'   O.TTO  if/vxys  KCIKTJS 
OVK  aiiros  Vdpifes,   dXXd  viv 
X&pas  /uacr/za  KCLL  de&v  t 

6KT6lv'  ',      'OpCOTTJS    Spa    7TOU    (SXtTTet    0aOS, 

OTTOJS  Kare\6<j}V  8evpo  Trpev/jLtvei  TVXV 
a.fj.<j>div  y&rjTai  rolvde  irayKparris  (frovevs  ;  2 


Aegisthus  interrupts  with  the  words  : 

dXX'  CTret  doKcls  rad'  epdeiv  /cat  \eyew,  yvuffft  rdxa-3 


The  mention  of  the  return  of  Orestes  seems  to  cause  the  change  ; 
yet  the  meeting  of  mother  and  son,4  in  a  sense  the  climax  of  the 
trilogy,  contains  an  iambic  stichomythy.  In  the  Agamemnon, 
Wecklein  5  alters  the  order  of  lines  and  emends  unnecessarily. 
If  we  should  accept  his  changes,  we  should  be  obliged  to  consider 
the  metre  as  marking  in  a  scene  of  excitement  the  conclusion 
of  one  play  of  a  trilogy.  It  is  possible,  however,  that  the 
prediction  of  the  exile's  return  may  influence  the  verse  here, 
although  this  must  not  be  too  much  emphasized. 

1  843-851.  4  Ch.  892-930. 

1  1643-1648.  *  Aschylos'  Orestie,  p.  159,  note  on  1643  S. 

3  1649. 


THE  TROCHAIC  TETRAMETER  59 

Probably  in  Oedipus  Rex  1515-1530,  trochaics  are  used  merely 
as  the  ending  of  the  play.  These  lines  follow  a  scene  which 
contains  prayers  and  predictions,  but  we  do  not  need  to  follow 
Prof.  Murray's  hint  l  and  see  in  the  departure  of  Oedipus  for 
Cithaeron  a  faded  theophany. 

In  Oedipus  Coloneus  887-890  (trochaic  lines),  Theseus  enters 
in  haste,  but  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  he  leaves  the  altar  of 
Poseidon  to  rescue  Oedipus.  Once  again  there  is  at  least  a  refer- 
ence to  a  god  in  the  trochaic  passage. 

Philoctetes  1402-1407  is  an  interesting  case.  After  Philoctetes 
says: 

Kai  fir)  fipadvve  /uT/5'  €Tnfj.vrj(r6fjs  2ri 
Tpotas"  aXts  yap  /JLOL  T^BprjvrjTat  7<XH$.2 

Neoptolemus  answers  in  trochaics  : 
ci  donei, 


Just  as  the  two  start,  the  anapaests  of  Heracles  are  heard  and 
Philoctetes  is  told  to  go  to  Troy.  Heracles  gives  his  com- 
mands in  iambics  and  then  the  final  anapaests  begin.  The 
use  of  trochaics  before  the  appearance  of  the  gods  obeys  the 
rule  which  we  observed  in  the  Persae. 

Except  for  the  Rhesus,  the  earliest  case  of  trochaics  in  the 
plays  of  Euripides  is  Hercules  Furens  855-873,  near  the  opening 
of  the  second  part  of  the  drama.  In  822-854,  Iris  and  Lyssa 
discuss  the  orders  of  Hera,  and  Lyssa  refuses  to  obey.  Iris  says  : 

nr)  ov  vovOtrci,  T&.  6'  "Hpas  /cd/ua  fjLrjxo.vrjfj.aTa.* 

Of  course  she  is  overshadowed  by  her  mistress,  and  the  use 
of  trochaics  shows  this.  Lyssa  submits.  Just  as  Darius  in  the 
Persae  turned  to  iambics  when  he  uttered  his  prophecy,  so  these 
goddesses  commence  trochaics  when  they  obey  the  commands 
of  Hera,  and  the  change  of  metre  makes  clear  their  subordination. 

1  Ritual  Forms,  p.  358.  *  1402. 

«  1400-1401.  4  855. 


60  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

In  the  Ion,  the  same  rule  is  observed.  In  the  trochaic  passage 
510-565,  Ion  inquires  about  Xuthus,  and  the  section  describes 
the  oracle  and  its  fulfilment.  As  soon  as  this  is  ended,  the 
iambics,  the  normal  measure  of  dialogue,  begin  again.  In  a 
scene  of  wild  excitement,1  after  the  failure  of  her  plot,  Creusa 
flees  to  the  altar.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  trochaics  begin 
here  again  when  the  characters  come  into  contact  with  the 
divine.  Ion  despite  his  excitement  uses  iambics.  Finally  at 
1553  Athena  appears  and  delivers  a  long  speech  in  iambics. 
Properly,  at  the  close,  Ion  resumes  trochaics2  and  the  play  ends 
with  them.  The  words  of  Athena  in  these  lines  are  of  slight 
importance.  She  has  delivered  her  message  and  the  interest 
centres  on  the  mortals.  Just  as  in  Pers.  787  ff  .  the  chorus 
used  iambics  after  Darius  had  finished,  here  Athena  speaks 
in  trochaics  to  prevent  awkward  changes  of  the  metre. 

Troades  444^61  is  a  similar  case.  In  427-443,  Cassandra 
predicts  the  fate  of  Odysseus.  Suddenly  she  changes  and  says  : 

dXXd  yap  ri  TOVS  'QSvcrffeus  Qanovrlfa  TTOVOVS] 
OTTCOS  To-xiar''  es  "Aidov  vv/j,4>lt>) 


She  foretells  her  own  death  and  Agamemnon's.  The  keynote 
of  the  passage  is  "  Farewell."  The  prophetess  changes  from  the 
inspired  seer  to  the  wretched  captive,  and  so  the  metre  marks 
the  descent  from  divine  to  human. 

Kanz  4  divides  Iphigenia  in  Tauris  1203-1233,  assigning 
1203-1221  to  the  second  division  and  1222-1233  to  the  first 
as  a  solemn  proclamation.  This  is  unnecessary,  as  the  under- 
lying thought  is  the  same.  The  orders  are  given  first  to  Thoas 
and  then  to  all,  so  that  no  real  division  exists.  In  these  lines, 
Iphigenia  applies  the  divine  commands  to  mortals,  after  the 
iambics6  have  revealed  the  pretended  will  of  the  goddess. 

1  1250-1260.      3  444-445.  •  1153-1202. 

1606  ff.        «  Op.  cU.t  p.  25. 


THE   TROCHAIC   TETRAMETER  61 

This  passage  then  is  regular  and  the  choice  of  metres  is  another 
evidence  of  the  cleverness  of  Iphigenia. 

Helena  1621-1641  is  a  scene  of  great  excitement,  for  Theo- 
clymenus  is  planning  vengeance  on  his  sister,  because  she  has 
allowed  Helen  to  escape.  At  the  close  of  this  section,  the 
Dioscuri  appear  and  in  iambics  forbid  the  king  to  punish 
Theonoe  or  to  pursue  the  fugitives.  After  they  have  finished, 
the  king  assents  briefly  in  iambics,  but  this  apparent  irregularity 
is  due  to  the  same  reason  as  in  the  Persae  and  the  Ion. 

The  Phoenissae  shows  a  wider  use  of  this  metre.  In  588-637, 
the  trochaics  are  employed  without  reference  to  divinity,  but 
they  give  a  very  animated  movement  to  the  quarrel  of  the  two 
brothers.  1308-1309  and  1335-1339  have  a  somewhat  emo- 
tional character.  Finally  1758-1763  (deleted  by  Wilamowitz) 
seem  to  point  definitely  to  the  ending  of  the  Oedipus  Rex.  In 
this  play,  then,  for  the  first  time  in  Euripides,  the  metre  cannot 
be  connected  with  divinity. 

In  the  Orestes,  the  return  of  Pylades  and  the  leaving  of  the 
friends  for  the  assembly  1  are  described  in  the  trochaic  metre. 
The  motive  is  approximately  that  of  Ag.  1649  ff.,  but  trochaics 
are  probably  used  for  the  sake  of  the  rapid  movement.  The 
same  is  perhaps  true  also  of  1506-1536,  the  meeting  of  Orestes 
and  the  Phrygian,  and  1549-1553,  the  announcement  of  the 
coming  of  Menelaus. 

In  Bacchae  604-641,  Prof.  Verrall  uses  the  metre  as  an 
argument  for  his  view  of  the  plot.  This  is  not  a  strong  argu- 
ment. Nowhere  have  we  found  a  god  as  god  using  the  trochaic 
metre.  The  clue  is  given  in  622-624 : 

kv  dl  rQde  T$  XP&VW 

aveTLva^'  i\6uv  6  B<£KX°S  5o>^ia  xai  /zijT/xis  r6.<fx^ 
Tfvp  bvitye. 

Dionysus  is  pretending  to  be  one  of  his  own  followers.2    As 

Darius,  when  speaking  as  the  dead  king,  used  trochaics,  so  here 

1  729-806.  *  Cf.  494,  498,  517. 


62  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

Dionysus,  posing  as  a  mortal,  speaks  in  the  same  metre.  This 
emphasizes  in  a  very  skilful  manner  the  disguise  of  the  god. 

In  the  Iphigenia  in  Aulide,  the  scene  between  the  two  brothers 
is  in  trochaics.1  In  this,  as  in  855-916,  the  poet  chose  this  metre 
for  no  apparent  reason.  Still,  in  the  second  passage,  it  is  inter- 
esting to  note  that  the  queen  appeals  to  Achilles,  the  son  of 
the  goddess  Thetis,  in  terms  applicable  to  a  god.2  Yet  we 
must  not  insist  too  strongly  upon  the  divine  parentage  of  Achilles 
as  responsible  for  the  use  of  the  trochaics  here.  We  might  find 
some  connection  perhaps  in  1338-1401,  where  Iphigenia  con- 
sents to  die  for  the  Greeks.  It  is  more  likely,  however,  that 
Euripides  used  this  metre  for  important  scenes  without  the 
usual  limitations. 

Rhesus  683-684,  686-691  are  trochaic.  They  occur  in  the 
fight  between  the  Trojans  and  the  Greek  chiefs,  but  we  must 
remember  that  Odysseus  and  Diomedes  are  acting  at  the 
instigation  and  under  the  direction  of  Athena. 

As  we  do  not  know  the  context  in  which  the  trochaic  lines 
preserved  among  the  fragments  were  situated,  they  do  not 
concern  us  here. 

It  is  difficult  to  agree  with  Kanz 3  that  Sophocles  used  the 
trochaic  as  a  substitute  for  the  anapaestic  metre.  No  doubt 
in  the  Agamemnon,  Oedipus  Rex,  and  Ion,  it  does  seem  to  en- 
croach upon  the  field  of  the  anapaest,  but  the  use  of  the  latter 
metre  in  a  situation  like  0.  C.  887-890  would  not  be  in  harmony 
with  the  usual  Sophoclean  practice.  Similarly,  in  Phil.  1402  ff., 
we  should  not  expect  anapaests  when  the  entrance  of  Heracles 
is  announced  in  the  same  metre.  There  may  be  some  en- 
croachment in  Phoen.  1308-1309  and  Or.  1549  ff.,  but  the 

1  317-375,  378-401. 
1  Cf.  900-901, 

oi>K  iiratSt(r6r]ffOfjiai  ye  irpooietativ  ri>  abv  ytaru, 
0wjT<Js  (K  Beat  yey&ra, 

and  also  903,  911.  »  Op.  cit.,  p.  23. 


THE   TROCHAIC   TETRAMETER  63 

hortatory  character  of  these  passages  would  render  them 
unsuited  for  conventional  anapaestic  treatment. 

We  may  then  trust  Aristotle  in  his  statements  as  to  the 
original  use  of  this  metre  in  tragedy.  It  was  early  given  up, 
but  it  retained  its  position  longest  in  marking  the  separation 
of  human  and  divine  and  at  the  end  of  plays.  In  these  places 
it  reappeared  first,  and  only  in  the  later  plays  of  Euripides  is 
it  used  in  important  scenes  without  such  cause. 

Its  use  in  tragedy  is  irregular,  for  the  iambic  trimeter  had 
obtained  such  a  hold  as  the  normal  metre  of  dialogue  that  it 
could  not  be  displaced  sufficiently  for  the  poets  to  use  the 
trochaic  tetrameter  consistently.  Euripides,  however,  employed 
it  very  freely  and  seemingly  cared  for  it,  perhaps  because  of  his 
love  of  archaism. 


CHAPTER  VII 

DESCRIPTION 

THE  plays  of  Aeschylus  and  Euripides  contain  long  descrip- 
tive passages  which  often  materially  delay  the  action  of  the 
drama.  In  this  discussion,  I  shall  consider  neither  most  of  the 
speeches  of  the  messengers  nor  such  sections  as  have  mainly 
political  importance,  e.g.,  Eur.,  Supp.  399-462,  but  shall  con- 
fine myself  to  those  passages  which  contain  definite  pieces  of 
description  and  narration. 

Critics  differ  in  their  judgment  of  the  long  geographical 
descriptions  in  the  dramas  of  Aeschylus.  Prof.  Post *  condemns 
them.  Mr.  Sheppard  is  less  severe  and  thinks  that  in  the 
Supplices  the  description  of  the  kingdom  of  Pelasgus  is  very 
dramatic  and  balances  the  invocation  of  Zeus.2 

Among  such  passages  are:  Supp.  249-273,  the  description 
of  the  kingdom  of  Pelasgus,  and  277-290,  the  names  of  the 
races  to  which  he  compares  the  daughters  of  Danaus;  P.  V. 
640-686,  lo's  account  of  her  wanderings,  and  700-741,  786-876, 
Prometheus'  recital  of  other  portions  of  her  travels  and  of  her 
future  toils.  (This  does  not  agree  with  the  choral  passage 
Supp.  538-564.)  The  easy  transition  from  description  to 
narration  is  seen  in  P.  V.  846-876,  where  the  Titan  mentions 
the  fate  of  lo's  descendants,  and  in  Ag.  281-316,  where  the 
queen  describes  the  coming  of  the  fire-signals  from  Troy  to 
Argos.  In  Pers.  480-514  we  learn  about  the  retreat  of  Xerxes, 
and  in  the  ode  864-896  about  the  conquests  of  Darius.  Among 

1  The  Dramatic  Art  of  Aeschylus,  Harvard  Studies,  Vol.  XVI,  p.  58. 
1  The  First  Scene  of  the  Suppliants  of  Aeschylus,  Classical  Quarterly, 
Vol.  V,  p.  228. 


DESCRIPTION  65 

the  fragments,  we  may  mention  30-32  from  the  Glaucus  Pontius 
and  those  from  the  Prometheus  Solutus.  Frag.  199  certainly, 
and  195-198  probably,  describe  the  journey  of  Heracles  to  the 
home  of  Geryon.  Frag.  190-192  from  the  parodos  tell  of  the 
route  of  the  Titans  on  their  way  to  visit  Prometheus. 

Such  geography  is  often  united  with  other  kinds  of  descrip- 
tion. In  Supp.  291-324,  Pelasgus  and  the  maidens  discuss 
genealogy.  Eum.  1-29  contain  a  list  of  the  deities  who  formerly 
owned  Delphi  or  were  worshipped  there.  We  may  mention 
here  also  the  history  of  the  kings  of  Persia  1  and  the  lists  of 
names  in  the  same  play.2  Among  long  passages  more  frankly 
narrative  are  P.  V.  199-243  and  436-506,  the  account  of  the 
career  of  Prometheus  and  of  the  benefits  which  he  had  conferred 
on  mortals.  Perhaps  we  may  mention  here  Sept.  369-719,  the 
description  of  the  seven  chiefs  who  lead  the  attack  on  Thebes. 

Some  choral  odes  have  the  same  characteristics.  Such  are: 
Supp.  538-564,  the  wanderings  of  lo;  Pers.  548-597,  the  ex- 
pedition of  Xerxes,  and  852-908,  the  reign  and  conquests  of 
Darius;  Sept.  720-791,  the  history  of  the  Labdacidae;  P.  V. 
399-435,  the  universality  of  the  lament  for  Prometheus;  Ag. 
40-257,  the  history  of  the  Trojan  war  and  the  sacrifice  of 
Iphigenia;  and  Ch.  22-11,  the  description  of  the  dream  of 
Clytaemestra  and  its  effects. 

We  see  then  that  if  Aeschylus  tells  a  story  in  dialogue  or 
ode,  it  is  usually  connected  with  the  plot  of  the  play.  He  is 
fond  of  long  iambic  descriptions  of  geography,  but  he  skilfully 
combines  in  these  both  narrative  and  geography. 

Sophocles  used  such  description  relatively  little.  Such  pas- 
sages, as  Ant.  909-912  and  0.  C.  337-345,  which  are  thought 
to  show  the  influence  of  Herodotus,  are  hardly  to  be  compared 
with  the  descriptions  of  Aeschylus.  In  citing  from  the  Trip- 
tolemus  (frag.  541),  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus  (Antiq.  I,  12), 
states  that  in  this  play  Demeter  predicted  the  wanderings  of 
1  Pers.  759-786.  *  1-64,  302-330,  955-1001. 


66  A    STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

Triptolemus  in  considerable  detail;  but  this  drama  seems  ex- 
ceptional. We  do  not  know  the  extent  of  the  description  of 
the  river  Inachus  seen  in  frag.  249  (Inachus).  In  the  Trachi- 
niae  are  brief  descriptions  of  the  marriage  of  Deianeira l  and 
of  some  of  the  labors  of  Heracles.2  There  is  little  detailed  narra- 
tion in  Ant.  100-154  and  Aj.  134-171,  and  in  Ant.806-832,  944- 
987  (the  comparison  of  Antigone  with  other  famous  sufferers). 

Euripides  follows  Aeschylus  rather  than  Sophocles.  Prof. 
Murray 3  remarks  on  Euripides'  indifference  to  geography. 
This  seems  true  only  if  we  take  as  measure  for  comparison 
the  grander  passages  of  Aeschylus,  but  even  there  narration 
and  geography  tended  to  fuse. 

Among  passages  where  we  find  such  description,  we  may  cite 
Cyd.  290-298,  a  list  of  temples  of  Poseidon,  and  Hec.  444-474 
and  Tro.  187-229,  two  choral  odes  in  which  the  probable 
destination  of  the  captives  is  discussed.  In  the  prologues,  as 
Bacch.  13-22,  the  travelling  of  Dionysus,  frag.  228  (Archelaus), 
the  wandering  of  Danaus,  and  frag.  819  (Phrixus),  the  story 
of  Cadmus,  we  find  some  well-marked  cases  of  this  usage. 
Frag.  383  (Theseus)  describes  Hades,  but  as  we  know  it  only 
from  the  parody  in  Aristoph.,  Ran.  470  ff.,  it  is  of  no  value  for 
our  purposes. 

I  shall  pass  over  the  use  of  genealogy  in  the  prologues,  of 
which  frag.  14  (Aeolus)  is  a  very  good  instance.  In  Her.  207- 
212,  the  relationship  of  Theseus  and  Heracles,  and  in  I.  A. 
695-713,  the  ancestry  of  Achilles,  are  discussed  much  as  the 
lineage  of  the  daughters  of  Danaus  in  Aesch.,  Supp.  291-324. 

Euripides  treats  classes  of  subjects  which  Aeschylus  does  not 
describe,  as  the  tent  of  Xuthus  at  Delphi.4  In  Supp.  857-917, 
Adrastus  delivers  a  funeral  oration  praising  the  various  dead 
chieftains.  Although  we  have  not  considered  the  speeches  of 
the  messengers,  Phoen.  1090-1199  should  be  mentioned  be- 

1  1—48.  3  History  of  Ancient  Greek  Literature,  p.  228. 

*  1090-1102.  «  Ion,  1141-1166. 


DESCRIPTION  67 

cause  of  its  similarity  to  the  account  of  the  leaders  in  the 
Septem  of  Aeschylus. 

It  is  in  the  choral  parts  that  Euripides  most  uses  both  descrip- 
tion and  narration.  The  parodos  of  the  Iphigenia  in  Aulide 1 
describes  the  Greek  camp  at  Aulis,  and  in  magnitude  it  is 
worthy  of  comparison  with  some  of  the  work  of  Aeschylus. 
Similar  but  shorter  are  the  parodoi  of  the  Ion 2  with  its  de- 
scription of  the  temple  of  Apollo  at  Delphi  and  that  of  the 
Hecuba 3  with  details  concerning  the  council  at  which  it  was 
decided  to  sacrifice  Polyxena.  In  /.  T.  203-235  and  Hel  191- 
211,  a  character  reviews  the  fortunes  of  his  relatives. 

Euripides  also  has  a  number  of  choral  songs  of  varying  length 
which  are  frankly  narrative  poems  at  times  loosely  connected 
with  the  plot.  Such  are:  H.  F.  348-441,  the  description  of  the 
labors  of  Heracles;  EL  432-486,  the  praise  of  Achilles'  might 
and  the  picture  of  his  shield;  699-746,  the  story  of  the  quarrel 
of  Atreus  and  Thyestes  over  the  golden  lamb;  I.  T.  1234-1283, 
the  history  of  the  conquest  of  Delphi  by  Apollo,  and  his  dis- 
possession of  Ge,  the  former  owner  of  the  shrine;  Phoen.  638- 
675,  the  tale  of  Cadmus  and  the  dragon;  1019-1066,  a  summary 
of  Theban  history  from  the  meeting  of  Oedipus  and  the  Sphinx; 
and  /.  A.  1036-1079,  an  account  of  the  wedding  of  Peleus  and 
Thetis.  Such  songs  occur  most  frequently  in  the  later  periods 
of  Euripides'  career. 

In  the  use  of  description  by  the  various  poets,  we  find  dif- 
ferent tendencies.  Aeschylus  is  most  interested  in  geography, 
and  his  narrative  odes  are  closely  connected  with  the  theme  of 
his  plays.  Sophocles  neglects  formal  description.  Euripides, 
in  spite  of  his  smaller  interest  in  geography,  on  the  whole,  follows 
Aeschylean  usage.  In  later  life  he  inserts  into  his  plays  narra- 
tive odes  which  are  very  loosely  connected  with  the  plots  of 
his  dramas  —  herein  also  reviving  and  continuing  the  tradi- 
tions of  Aeschylus  rather  than  those  of  Sophocles. 

*  164-302.  »  184-218.  »  98-153. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

DREAMS 

IN  their  treatment  of  dreams,  Aeschylus  and  Euripides  again 
agree  with  each  other  and  differ  from  Sophocles.  The  references 
fall  into  two  groups:  (1)  those  which  are  meant  to  be  taken 
seriously  and  are  of  importance  to  the  play;  (2)  those  which 
emphasize  the  unsubstantial  character  of  these  apparitions, 
often  mere  metaphorical  passages  hardly  worthy  of  mention. 

The  dream  of  Atossa  in  Pers.  176-200  is  very  important. 
She  sees  in  her  sleep  Xerxes  trying  to  yoke  to  his  chariot  two 
women,  one  a  Greek,  the  other  a  barbarian.  The  former  is 
not  submissive  and  breaks  loose,  and  the  king  falls  from  the 
chariot.  This  dream  is  a  portent  and  is  confirmed  by  the  sight 
of  the  hawk  pursuing  the  eagle  to  the  hearth  of  Phoebus.1 

In  P.  V.  645  ff.,  dreams  warn  lo  to  leave  home  and  become 
the  beloved  of  Zeus.  She  tells  her  father  Inachus, 


6  5'  ?s  re  Hvddo  Kairl  AcoSw^s  TTVKVOVS 
TOvs  taXXev,  cbs  /j.adoi  ri  XP7? 
T)  \eyovra  dai/Jiocnv  irpaaativ  </>£Xa.2 


When  a  clear  answer  is  received, 
roiotcrSe 


Loxias  then  is  the  interpreter  of  dreams,  although  Prometheus 
says  that  he  himself  has  taught  this  art  to  mortals.4  The  sender 
is  not  definitely  stated. 

1  205-210.  l  658-660.  3  669-670.  4  485-487. 


DREAMS  69 

In  the  Choephori,  Clytaemestra  dreams  that  she  bears  and 
nurses  a  serpent,  which  later  stings  her  breast.  Terrified  by 
this  vision,  she  sends  libations  to  Agamemnon's  tomb.1  On 
hearing  the  dream,  Orestes  accepts  the  omen, 

€KdpaKOVTO)6els  8'  ty& 

VLV,    COS    TOVVCipOV    kweiTfL    To5e.2 


The  queen  applies  it  : 


and  Orestes  answers  : 

17  /cdpra  fjiavTis  ov£  oveiparuv  06/3oj.4 


In  the  Eumenides,  the  ghost  of  Clytaemestra  rouses  and 
reproaches  the  sleeping  Furies,  because  they  are  not  pursuing 
Orestes.  When  awakened,  one  of  the  goddesses  says: 


8'  ovecSos  e£  ompdrcoj/  /JLO\OV 
y  bluav  8i<}>pri\aTov 


Similarly,  in  Ag.  1218,  Cassandra  sees  the  ghosts  of  the  mur- 
dered children  of  Thyestes,  bvdpuv  7rpo<r</>epeis  /iop^dj/xaai. 

Among  references  of  the  second  class,  we  may  mention  the 
following.  The  daughters  of  Danaus  call  the  outrage  of  the 
herald,  ovap  5vap  nk\a.v  .  .  .  <f>o(3cp6v.6  Prometheus  says  that 
men,  before  they  had  learned  a  language,  were  dveLparuv  0X17*101 
Mop^cuai.7  There  are  several  references  in  the  Agamemnon. 
In  82,  because  of  his  weakness  an  old  man  is  called  <Wp  -fine- 
p6<t>ai>Tov.  In  275,  the  queen,  denying  that  she  has  heard  of  the 
fall  of  Troy  through  dreams,  says  : 

ov  86$-av  &v  XA/3ot/u  /3pif  060-175  ^pepoj. 

1  32  ff.  »  928.  *  155  ff.  '  P.  V.  448-449. 

2  549-550.  *  929.  •  Supp.  888  ff. 


70  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 


In  491  and  980  f.,  the  phrase  oveLparuv  dlnriv  is  used  as  a  type  of 
something  that  is  easy  to  efface. 

Aeschylus  often  considers  dreams  as  portents.  He  does  not 
name  the  sender,  but  he  shows  them  as  obedient  to  the  will  of 
Zeus.  Apollo  is  the  best  interpreter  and  sees  that  they  are 
obeyed,  as  mortals  can  also  interpret.  The  poet  also  uses 
dreams  as  a  type  of  the  unsubstantial.  Dreams  and  the  spirits 
of  the  dead,  especially  of  the  murdered,  are  closely  connected. 

In  the  extant  plays  of  Sophocles,  there  is  but  one  important 
dream,  and  that  one  is  probably  due  to  the  influence  of  Aes- 
chylus. In  Electra  417  ff.,  Chrysothemis  tells  how  her  mother 
dreamed  that  the  sceptre  of  Agamemnon  took  root  and  grew 
till  it  overshadowed  all  Mycenae  and  how  in  consequence  she 
sent  libations  to  her  husband's  tomb.  This  dream  is  often 
mentioned,1  but  it  is  not  used  as  an  omen  to  encourage  Orestes 
as  is  the  one  in  the  Choephori.  The  unreal  class  is  represented 
in  0.  R.  981  and  frag.  62  (Acrisius). 

The  Hecuba  of  Euripides  contains  an  important  passage  on 
this  subject.  The  ghost  of  Polydorus  concludes  his  speech  with 


ytpaiq.  8'  enirod&v 
7rep£  yap  r/5'   VTTO  (TKrjvrjs  Troda 


Hecuba  then  says: 


&  orepOTra  Atos,  &  anorla,  vv£, 
rl  ITOT'  cupo/xcu  Zvvvxos  oimo 
,  <f>a<Tfj,a<TLV', 


Trepi  Traidos  c/iou  rov  ff<f^onkvov  Kara 

oXv&lvys  re  0tXr/j  dvyarpos  5t'  bvelpuv 
[dSov  yap]  (froftcpav   [6\f/iv  e/jia6ov] 


Cf.  480  f.,  501,  644  f.,  1390.  *  52-54.  3  68  flf. 


DREAMS  71 

She  seeks  an  interpreter: 

TroO  Trore  deLav  'EXerou  \f/vxo.v 


Ko.1  K.aaav8pa.v  ea"i 

ws  fjML  Kplvwiv  oveipovs', 
tldov  yap  ftaKiav  eXa0ov  \VKOV  alp/ovi 
a<}>a.$ontva.v,  air'  tfji&v  yovarwv  <nra.<jQtiaa.v 

She  fears  for  her  daughter's  life,  because  the  ghost  of  Achilles 
has  recently  appeared  and  demanded  that  one  of  the  Trojan 
maidens  be  sacrificed  to  him,  and  she  has  not  yet  learned  whether 
the  chieftains  have  decided  to  obey  this  savage  command. 
We  should  note  that  here  the  source  of  dreams  is  X6&t>  and  not 
some  associate  of  Zeus  or  Apollo.  Later2  the  queen  laments 
that  she  did  not  need  an  interpreter,  for  she  herself  had  guessed 
too  well  the  sad  truth. 

The  dream  in  the  Iphigenia  in  Tauris  is  also  important. 
Iphigenia  dreams  that  she  has  consecrated  to  Artemis  the  one 
column  of  her  ancestral  palace  which  had  withstood  a  severe 
earthquake.3  She  concludes  that  Orestes  is  dead  4  and  tells 
this  to  the  chorus.5  When  she  learns  that  her  brother  is  still 
alive,  she  says  : 

^euSeZj  oveipoi,  xa'iPfr''  ovdiv  fir'  apa.6 
Orestes  answers: 

ou5'  ot  ffofoL  76  datjuom 
bvelpwv  fifflv 


The  choral  passage  1234-1283  explains  why  the  dream  is  mis- 
leading. Ge  had  been  dispossessed  by  Apollo,  and  in  revenge 
sent  dreams  to  weaken  the  intruder,  until  Zeus  interfered  to 
help  his  son  and  restore  him  to  honor  at  Delphi.  Although 
the  poet  views  this  strife  as  past,  he  shows  that  dreams  are  not 
from  Apollo  but  from  the  enemy  of  the  god,  the  dispossessed  Ge. 

1  87  ff.  *  42  ff.  •  143  ff.  7  570-571. 

*  702  ff.  «  56  ff.  •  569. 


72  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

Among  minor  passages  and  those  of  the  second  class  are  the 
following.  In  Or.  616  f.,  Tyndareus  attacks  Electra  because  by 
telling  dreams  about  Agamemnon  she  has  stirred  up  hatred 
against  her  mother.  In  Cyd.  8,  Silenus  asks  if  his  part  in  the 
battle  of  the  gods  and  giants  was  but  a  dream.  In  Ale.  354  f., 
Admetus  declares  that  his  dead  wife  will  comfort  him  by  appear- 
ing in  dreams,  an  idea  analogous  to  that  of  frag.  107  (Alope). 
In  H.  F.  517  ff.,  Heracles  appears  like  a  dream  to  his  family. 
Like  Aeschylus,  Euripides  refers  to  old  men  as  dreams  or 
shadows  of  dreams  in  H.  F.  112,  Phoen.  1722,  and  frag.  25 
(Aeolus).  In  Phoen.  1545,  Oedipus  wishes  to  know  if  he  has 
been  summoned  because  of  a  dream.  To  the  charioteer,  the 
attack  on  Rhesus  seemed  a  dream.1  Frag.  533  (Meleager) 
says  that,  even  in  dreams,  one  does  not  care  for  the  darkness  of 
Hades. 

Like  Aeschylus,  Euripides  both  emphasizes  the  unreality 
of  dreams  and  makes  them  important  in  the  economy  of  his 
plots.  Aeschylus  regards  them  as  under  the  control  of  Zeus 
or  Apollo,  as  far  as  they  are  substantial.  Euripides,  who  in 
this  shows  stronger  traces  of  archaism  or  even  popular  theology, 
connects  them  quite  definitely  with  Ge,  Xd&v,  the  goddess  of 
Earth,  one  of  the  older  deities,  independent  of  and  even  hostile 
to  Zeus  and  Apollo.  Yet  the  prophets  of  Apollo,  as  Cassandra, 
interpret.  Since  Sophocles  rarely  used  dreams  in  his  dramas, 
it  is  Euripides  again  who  evidently  continued  the  tradition  of 
Aeschylus. 

1  Rh.  782. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE   RELIGION    OF   EURIPIDES 

PERHAPS  it  is  in  the  religious  sphere  that  we  find  some  of  the 
most  interesting  examples  of  Euripides'  archaism.  These  may 
be  due  partly  to  dramatic  and  technical  considerations,  but 
they  are  also  partially  caused  by  the  attitude  of  the  poet 
towards  .religion  itself.  In  many  ways  doubtless  the  poet  was 
an  innovator  in  this  field;  yet  it  is  dangerous  to  generalize  in 
regard  to  his  belief.  We  must  never  forget  that  Euripides  was 
writing  on  religious  themes  for  a  religious  festival. 

A  very  frequent  cause  of  misconception  of  the  poet's  attitude 
is  a  tendency  to  overemphasize  the  unity  of  Greek  religion. 
So  Prof.  Verrall l  writes: 

"To  every  human  being,  that  power,  which  he  thinks  capable  of  deal- 
ing in  the  last  resort  with  human  life,  is  God.  On  his  conception  of 
that  power  depends,  directly  or  indirectly,  all  that  he  can  think.  In 
the  days  of  Euripides  the  defenders  of  old  religion  maintained  with 
regard  to  this  question  exactly  what  is  assumed  in  the  prologue  [of 
the  Alcestis],  that  this  power  resided  in  certain  beings,  who  had  many 
organs  of  communication  with  man,  but  one  organ  of  incomparable 
importance,  the  oracle  of  the  Pythian  Apollo :  and  upon  this  founda- 
tion reposed  a  vast  structure  of  social,  civil,  and  national  usage  just 
then  beginning  perceptibly  to  totter." 

From  this  point  of  view,  it  is  easy  for  him  to  conclude  that 
Euripides  did  not  believe  in  the  gods.  Yet  it  is  admitted  that 
there  was  no  official  creed  and  that  the  gods  were  of  different 
origins.  Euripides  is  called  a  rationalist  because  he  criticized 
the  gods,  and  to  prove  the  charge,  his  views  of  Zeus  and  Apollo 
1  Euripides  the  Rationalist,  p.  114. 


74  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

are  cited.  These  are  not  the  whole  pantheon,  and  some  would 
consider  them  late  arrivals  in  Greece  and  maintain  that  their 
worship  was  fostered  by  the  tyrants  in  order  to  reduce  the 
power  of  the  nobles  who  supported  the  local  cults.1  To  under- 
stand Euripides'  views,  one  should  study  separately  the  treat- 
ment of  each  god,  always  remembering  that  Euripides  was  bound 
to  respect  the  externals  of  religion  because  of  the  position  of 
Greek  tragedy  as  a  religious  ceremony.  Then  we  might  not 
agree  with  the  cynical  interpretation  of  Hel.  1301  ff.  set  forth 
by  Mr.  W.  Scott:2  "The  gods  kill  us  for  their  sport  and  we 
persuade  ourselves  that  we  can  secure  ourselves  against  the 
malignity  of  fate  —  by  beating  a  tambourine."  The  following 
are  offered  as  examples  of  the  way  in  which  Euripides'  attitude 
toward  different  gods  varies,  and  to  show  how  we  may  detect 
a  noticeable  archaistic  tendency  in  his  treatment  of  them. 

1.  Dionysus 

Dionysus  and  the  Bacchae  form  a  natural  centre  around  which 
the  discussion  of  Euripides'  religion  revolves.  Is  this  play  a 
recantation  or  an  attack  on  the  god?  Whichever  is  true,  the 
spirit  of  this  drama  seems  different  from  that  of  any  of  the 
earlier  plays. 

Most  scholars  are  agreed  that  the  connection  of  Dionysus 
and  tragedy  was  very  close  and,  if  not  original,  yet  of  long 
standing.  A  Pentheus  of  Thespis  is  mentioned,  although  Nauck3 
declares  that  the  titles  and  fragments  of  the  plays  of  Thespis 
are  spurious.  We  know  only  the  title  and  one  line  of  the  Or- 
pheus of  Aristias,  probably  a  drama  on  a  Dionysiac  subject, 
but  nothing  of  the  treatment. 

Aeschylus  wrote  many  such  plays  —  Bd/cxcu,  Batro-apcu, 
Aiovvvov  Tpo0ot,  'Hdcwoi,  Au/coDpyos  SaruptKos,  Hevdevs, 


1  Sheppard,  Greek  Tragedy,  p.  3. 

1  The    Mountain-Mother   Ode    in    the  Helena   of  Euripides,  Classical 
Quarterly,  Vol.  Ill,  p.   170.  3  Frag?,  p.  832. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  75 

In  contrast  to  this  list,  the  references  to  Dionysus 
in  the  extant  plays  are  few  and  mostly  unimportant.  Such 
are: 


Sept.  497-499,  ('iTTTo/teScov)  ejtfeos  5'  "Ap« 

/8aKx£  irpbs  a\Kriv  0uia$  cos  <f>6vov 
835—836  ereu£a  Ti>/z/3cj>  /zeXos 

0uias  a>s. 

Ch.     698-699,  vw  5'  f)irep  kv  56/xotfft  /3a/cxcias  KaX^s 

iarpos  eXTris  ^P,  TrpoSoOerav  €yypa(f>€. 

In  .Efora.  24-26,  we  have  a  definite  mention  of  the  worship  of 
Bromios  at  Delphi.  In  frag.  5  (Aegyptii)  and  228  (Sisyphus) 
the  name  Zaypcvs  is  found.  In  frag.  341,  we  have: 

6  Kiff<rcvs  'A7r6XXcov,  6 
and  in  frag.  355,  .  .  .  ju£o/36av 


To  Aeschylus,  Dionysus  seems  to  have  been  a  god  of  revel  and 
ecstasy,  of  untamed  emotions;  yet  the  poet,  because  of  his 
especial  devotion  to  Zeus,  allows  Dionysus  to  take  a  subordinate 
place  in  plays  on  non-Dionysiac  themes. 

Sophocles  apparently  wrote  no  serious  Dionysiac  drama, 
although  he  mentions  the  god  more  frequently  than  does  Aes- 
chylus. Among  the  instances  we  may  cite  Ant.  136,  where  the 
word  /3a/cxei>coj/  is  used  to  describe  the  manner  in  which  Capaneus 
attacked  Thebes.  Some  of  the  passages  in  which  the  god  is 
named  in  connection  with  Thebes  are  Ant.  153  f,1  1121  ff.,  Tr. 
510  ff,  0.  R.  209  ff.  In  Ant.  957,  his  punishment  of  Lycurgus, 
son  of  Dryas,  is  mentioned.  He  is  connected  with  the  grape  in 
Tr.  704  and  frag.  234  (Thyestes).  In  0.  R.  1105,  he  is  regarded 
as  a  possible  father  of  Oedipus.  In  0.  C.  679,  he  is  at  Colonus, 
and  in  frag.  874,  he  loves  Nysa.  Finally  in  frag.  607  (Tyro), 


76  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

we  read  Aiovvcrov  rov  ravpoff^ayov.    Dionysus  or  Bacchus,  his 
more  common  name,  is  especially  associated  with  Thebes. 

To  appreciate  the  neglect  of  Dionysus,  even  in  his  own  do- 
main, we  must  consult  the  Ichneutae.  In  127,  we  find  the  phrase, 
ri  irore  panxeveis  excov.  In  219-222,  Cyllene  says  to  the  Satyrs 
concerning  their  master  Silenus  : 

vfiiv  5s  aid  veftpivy 


euiafcr'  afjufrl  TOV  6eov 
<rvv  kyyovots  vv/jL<f>atffi  K 

Dionysus  is  not  mentioned  by  name,  and  the  poet  does  not 
emphasize  the  connection  between  the  god  and  the  Satyrs. 

The  atmosphere  of  the  Cyclops  of  Euripides  is  very  different. 
The  opening  words,  w  Bp6/ue,  give  the  keynote.  Silenus  and  his 
crew,  while  on  their  way  to  rescue  Dionysus  from  the  pirates 
who  have  captured  him,  have  been  seized  by  the  Cyclops. 
The  god  is  mentioned  frequently  and  always  respectfully.  He 
is  pre-eminently  the  god  of  wine.1  Some  passages,  as  519-520, 


os  tyo)  TOV 
TOVTOV  Tpiftuv  elu',  6v  Trieiv  eSco/cd  eroi, 

might  suggest  that  the  god  and  wine  are  identified,  but  others, 
as  the  oi>x.i  Aiowaos  rd6c  2  of  the  Cyclops  when  he  first  sees  Odys- 
seus, and  the  prologue,  seem  to  show  that  we  are  not  to  consider 
Dionysus  merely  as  the  personification  of  the  vine,  although 
this  conception  is  sometimes  present.  In  this  connection,  521- 
522  are  significant,  — 

Cyc.   6  Bd^xios  5e  ris  0eos  po/uf€Tcu; 
Od.     jueyioTos  avQp&Troicnv  ks  repif/iv  ftlov. 

We  must  remember,  however,  that  Odysseus  is  praising  wine 
to  deceive  the  Cyclops.  The  only  reproach  of  the  god  is  in  527  : 

ov  TOVS  deoiis  XPV  ff&lJ-'  exfiv  &  fepnacriv. 
1  123,  BpoAifoi;  5*  irwju'  txovffty,  &nire\ov  fx>ais;   and  139.  2  204. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  77 

When  we  compare  this  with  the  blasphemous  words  of  the 
Cyclops  commencing, 

ov8'  ol8'  6  TL  Zeus  tar'  c/ioO  Kpfiacruv  6e6s,1 

and  with  the  attitude  of  Odysseus  towards  Zeus,2  we  see  how 
well  Euripides  treats  Dionysus.  Important  also  are  63-67 
and  205,  where  the  cymbals  and  rattles,  often  associated  with 
Cybele,  are  mentioned. 

In  the  Hippolytus,  we  hear  more  of  Dionysus.  Phaedra 
calls  her  sister,  Ariadne,  kiovvcov  86.fj.ap?  The  birth  of  Bacchus 
is  hailed  as  one  of  the  works  of  Cypris.4  Finally  Theseus 
addresses  his  son: 

'Qp<t>fa  T'  avaicr'  fyuv 
ftaKXfve  TTO\\S)V  ypaiJ.n&.T<i)v  TIH&V  Kairvovs.0 

In  this  passage,  it  is  difficult  to  determine  whether  or  not  the 
poet  is  clearly  thinking  of  the  connection  between  Bacchus  and 


In  Hec.    121,    Cassandra    is    called    rfjs   navrnrfaov 
and  a  similar  phrase  is  used  of  her  in  676-677,  Tro.  408,  500, 
and  elsewhere.    In  Hec,  686-687,  Hecuba  expresses  her  woes  in 

£  dXaaropos 


In  1077,  E&KXO.IS  "AiSov  is  used  of  murderous  rage6  and  a  similar 
phrase  is  applied  to  the  maddened  Heracles  in  H.  F.  1119. 
Finally  in  Hec.  1267,  the  oracle  which  Polymestor  tells  to  Hecuba 
is  from  6  9pp£i  navris  .  .  .  Advwos. 

In  H.  F.  682,  the  phrase  napa  re  JSpbfjuov  oivo86rav  is  used  of 
a  feast.    On  hearing  the  cries  of  Amphitryon,  the  chorus  says, 


ob  ftponUi)  itexa-Pi-vv&a.  0i>p<rcj>.7 

Here  again  is  a  reference  to  the  ritual  instruments  of  Cybele. 

i  321.  »  339.  «  953-954.  »  891-892. 

»  353-355.  «  559-560.  •  Heberden,  Hecuba,  p.  120. 


78  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

In  Ion  216-218,  the  chorus  mentions  Bacchus'  participation 
in  the  battle  of  the  gods  and  giants  as  a  subject  represented 
among  the  temple  sculptures.  Dionysiac  feasts  at  Delphi  are 
mentioned  several  times.1  In  1232,  the  attempted  murder  of 
Ion  is  detected  (rirovdas  kn  Aiovucrou. 

In  El.  497,  a  jar  of  wine  is  6-tivavpicFiJ.a.  Atopftaov. 

In  /.  T.  164,  BOLKXOU  T'  oivijpas  XoijSas  is  a  phrase  for  wine. 
In  1243-1244,  the  revellings  of  Dionysus  at  Delphi  are  again 
mentioned. 

In  Hel.  543-544,  Helen  says,  on  seeing  Menelaus  : 

oi>x  ^s  dpoftaia  ircoXos  »} 


There  is  a  union  of  Dionysus  and  the  Mother  in  1358  ff  .  : 
fj,eya  TOL  dvvarai  vefip&v 


re  aT€(f)e<Ta 
pdr^Kas  €ts  iepous, 
6'  d\(,aaojj.kva. 
KUK\IOS  evoffis  aldepia, 
flaKxevovffa  T'  Wtipa.  Bpojitt- 
c>  /cat 


In  Phoen.  226-228,  there  is  a  reference  to  the  revels  at  Delphi  ; 
in  1751,  to  Bacchic  revels  on  other  mountains;  in  649  ff.,  to 
the  birth  of  Dionysus;  and  in  785,  we  are  told  that  Ares  is  not 
at  the  feasts  of  Bromios. 

In  Or.  835,  the  matricide  j8e/3d/cxeuTcu  navicus.  In  1492  ff., 
the  young  men  seized  Hermione 

advpcroL  5' 

old  viv  SpafjLOVTf  BaKxai 
aav^vov  kv  xeP°t''  opctac 


1  550-553,  716-717,  1125-1126 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  79 


In  Rh.  972,  Rhesus  will  become  a  BO.KXOV 

In  Hypsipyle  1  (N2.  752),  Dionysus  is  mentioned  in  con- 
nection with  Delphi.  In  41,106,  Thoas  is  saved  Beucxiou  7* 
fjLrjxo-vals.  Dionysus  appears  as  deus  ex  machina.1 

Some  of  the  important  fragments  are: 

frag.  177  (Antigone)         &  TTOI  Aid^s,  ws  tyvs  /zeyas  6e6s, 


472  (Cretes)  1.  11  ff.       KCU  vvnTnrbXov  Zayptus 
TOUS  cb/i<x£d7ous  5atras 
MTpl  T'   6peu«j 
icai 


477  (Licymnius)  where  Dionysus  and  Apollo  are  identified. 

562  (Oeneus)  where  the  phrase  Ba*xtou  Tofcu/iacriv  is  found 

in  a  reference  to  the  KO 


586  (Palamedes)     Qvaav 

&v'  "I8av 
avv 
(fir') 


From  these  passages  we  can  draw  a  few  conclusions.  Dionysus 
is  the  god  of  the  Maenads  and  the  midnight  revel  on  the  moun- 
tains. He  is  god  of  wine.  He  is  often  allied  with  the  great 
Mother,  Cybele,  whose  worship  is  also  orgiastic.  Frag.  472  is 
peculiarly  valuable,  as  it  shows  conditions  in  Crete.2  The  frenzy 
of  a  Cassandra  and  any  madness  take  their  names  from  him. 
Nowhere  is  there  a  condemnation  of  the  god,  except  perhaps 
in  frag.  177,  and  that  is  a  tribute  to  his  power. 

Now  we  can  consider  the  Bacchae.  Dionysus,  the  son  of 
Semele,  comes  to  Thebes.  The  women  are  drawn  by  his  power 

1  Cf.  note  on  41,  112  in  Frag.  Trag.  Pap.  and  Petersen,  Euripides' 
Hypsipyle,  Rheinisches  Museum,  Vol.  LXVIII,  p.  584  ff. 
1  Cf.  Roscher,  Lexikon,  Vol.  II,  1,  pp.  1596. 


80  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

to  Cithaeron.  Pentheus  resists  the  god  and  pays  the  penalty. 
As  before,  Dionysus  is  connected  with  the  Mother.1  Tiresias 
defines  the  god's  prophetic  power: 

HCLVTIS  8'  6  OO.IIJMV  68f  TO  yap 
Kai  TO  fj,avi(t)8ts  navruiiiv  7roXXijj> 
OTO.V  yap  6  debs  «  TO  aw/*'  eX0p  TroXus, 
Xeyeii'  TO  fj,e\\ov  TOVS  jte/njj'OTas  Trotet.2 

This  explains  the  description  of  Cassandra  in  the  Hecuba  and 
Troades  as  BCIKX*?- 

The  offence  of  Pentheus  is  not  only  vftpis  but  also  dae/Seia, 
neglect  of  the  new  deity  and  therefore  impiety.    Dionysus  says 

6s  0eo/zaxeT  TO.  /car'  ejue  /ecu  (rirovS&v  a-jro 
a>0el  fj.',  ev  evxals  T'  oi»5ajuou  fiveiav  exci. 
S)v  OVVCK'  avT<$  debs  yty&s  k 


In  206-209,  Tiresias  states  that  the  god  wants  honor  from  all, 
old  and  young.  The  dcrc/Seia  of  Pentheus  is  recognized  by  the 
messenger,4  Agave,6  and  Cadmus.6  The  king  threatens  to 
bring  back  the  women  by  force  7  and  has  the  god  arrested. 
1  Cf.  58-59, 


a,  'Peas  re  (juirpfc  «/i«  6' 
and  72—82,  n&Kap,  ocrns 

reXeras  Beu>v 

/Stordv  ayiffTefai  KO.L 

Oiaarevtrai 

b>  opeavi 

Offloa  Ka6ap/j.olffLt>, 
TO.  re  Atarpo?  juc^dXas  6p- 
yia  Ku/3eXas 
&V£L  diipffov  re 
KiffffQ  re  ffre<j>avudeis 
Aiovvcrov  depcnrevei, 

and  120-134. 

8  298-301.  4  1150-1152.  «  1303. 

3  45-48.  5  1255-1256.  7  780-786. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  81 

Yet  in  his  blindness,  he  will  not  see  that  by  escaping,  Dionysus 
has  shown  superhuman  power.  Pentheus  stands  for  respecta- 
bility, for  the  maintenance  of  law,  for  the  openness  of  action. 
The  god  praises  darkness  and  secrecy. 

Pen.     TO.  §'  Upa  VVKT&P  r)  jue0'  •fjp.fpav  reXets; 

Di.  VVKTUp    TO.    TToXXd*    ffe/JiVOT^T'    5=Xct    CTKOTOJ. 

Pen.  TOUT'  es  yvvalKas  86\wv  tart.  KCU  aaQpbv. 

Di.  KO.V  rjjj.€pa  TO  y'  aiaxpov  e£ei>poi  Tts  a.v. 

Pen.  S'ucrjv  ff€  oovvai  del  aofyi.aiiQ.TUtv  K.O.K.&V. 

Di.  at  8'   a/j.adia<;  ye  Kaffefiovvr'  «  rbv 


The  appeal  of  Cadmus  to  Pentheus  2  is  not  so  open  to  con- 
demnation as  some  think.  The  old  man  wants  his  grandson 
to  prove  true  and  be  a  god.  Pentheus  has  absolutely  refused 
to  believe.  Cadmus  asks  him  to  cease  opposition  on  the  ground 
of  safety  and  cites  the  example  of  Actaeon,  but  the  king  will 
not  yield. 

Mr.  Norwood  8  and  Prof.  Verrall  4  both  deny  that  Euripides 
intended  to  represent  Dionysus  as  a  god.  They  think  that  he 
is  drawn  as  a  mortal  of  unusual  daring  and  unscrupulousness, 
and  they  defend  Pentheus.  In  their  theories,  the  king  is  de- 
ceived by  a  bold  impostor,  if  not  actually  drugged,  and  is  then 
cruelly  slain.  These  theories  rest  on  the  hypothesis  that  the 
prologue  and  deus  ex  machina  are  to  be  neglected  in  a  correct 
interpretation  of  the  play.  As  we  have  seen,6  such  a  method  of 
treatment  is  without  justification  and  destroys  much  of  the 
beauty  and  practically  all  of  the  clarity  of  Euripides'  art. 

Pentheus  is  a  ruler  who  is  always  ready  to  compel  obedience 
to  his  laws  by  force  —  the  dragon's  seed.  It  is  not  by  chance 
that  he  is  again  and  again  characterized  as  in  537  ff  .  : 

olav  oiav  opyav 


1  485-490.  »  The  Riddle  of  the  Bacchae.  •  Chap.  I. 

1  330-342.  4  The  Bacchants  of  Euripides. 


82  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

(K<j)VS    T 


TTOTC 


repas,  ov 
ra  ftpoTfiov,  <j>6vu)v  8'  ha- 
rt 717  OLVT'   avTiirakov  0eots* 

and  1015-1016: 

TOV  adeov  HVO/JLOV  adutov  'Exiovos 
TOKOV  yrjyevfj. 

He  mocks  the  idea  that  Zeus  could  beget  new  gods  1  and  wishes 
to  destroy  the  property  of  Tiresias  2  because  he  thinks  the  seer 
is  pious  only  for  the  sake  of  gain.3  Such  a  character  Euripides 
defends  in  no  extant  play. 

In  this  play,  Euripides  has  not  changed  his  views  of  Dionysus. 
He  knew  from  his  own  experience  at  Athens  how  despotism 
could  lurk  under  the  guise  of  freedom,  and  he  knew  the  cruelty 
of  those  who  fought  to  build  an  empire. 

"  In  the  Athens  of  Melos  and  the  Sicilian  expedition  there  was  some- 
thing that  roused  his  aversion  far  more  than  did  the  mere  ignorance 
of  a  stupid  Greek  farmer.  It  was  a  deeper  'amathia,'  a  more  unteach- 
able  brutality.  The  men  who  spoke  in  the  Melian  Dialogue  were 
full  of  what  they  called  'Sophia.'  .  .  .  And  the  Herd,  as  represented 
by  Athens,  followed  them."4 

Pentheus  is  one  of  those  leaders.  The  Dionysus  of  the  poet 
was  in  a  sense  his  own,  but  in  the  main,  he  is  the  Dionysus  of 
tradition  —  of  Thracian  tradition,  the  real  Dionysus  of  the 
people. 

Did  Euripides  approve  of  this  story?  Prof.  Macurdy5  regards 
the  idea  as  shocking.  Prof.  Murray  6  finds  a  shift  of  sympathy 

1  467.  «  255-257. 

1  346-351.  4  Murray,  Euripides  and  His  Age,  p.  191  f. 

1  The  Chronology  of  the  Extant  Plays  of  Euripides,  p.  127. 

6  Euripides  and  His  Age,  p.  185. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  83 

at  the  time  when  Dionysus  becomes  supreme  just  as  in  the 
Medea  and  in  other  studies  in  revenge.  We  may  think  Dionysus 
cruel  and  unworthy  of  worship,  but  we  must  remember  that 
many  religious  conceptions,  to  us  commonplace  and  faded 
through  familiarity,  were  unknown  to  the  Greeks.  The  motto 
of  Aeschylus  was  dpa<ravTi  iraBtiv  —  the  soul  that  sinneth,  it 
shall  die  —  an  idea  founded  on  a  solid  basis  of  observed  facts. 
Pentheus,  impious  and  violent,  matches  himself  against  Di- 
onysus, 0e6$,  SeiWTaTos,  avdp&TTOKTi  5'  ^iruoraros,1  and  the  result 
is  never  doubtful.  The  use  made  of  Agave  is  cruel,  but  Pen- 
theus was  willing  to  use  force  against  her2  and  Aristophanes3 
shows  the  enormity  of  such  an  offence. 

Euripides  always  shows  Dionysus  as  a  powerful  god  and 
honors  him  throughout  his  whole  career.  He  glorifies  him  in 
the  Cyclops  and  still  more  in  the  Bacchae.  This  last  mentioned 
play  could  be  fairly  judged  only  if  we  possessed  a  Dionysiac 
play  of  Aeschylus,  for  the  spirit  is  almost  that  of  the  older  poet 
and  very  different  from  that  of  Sophocles.  We  hear  again  the 
cry  dpacravri  irafitiv.  Although  Euripides  may  have  felt  the 
cruelty  of  Dionysus,  yet  he  obeys  and  worships  him  as  a  god 
who  is  on  the  whole  beneficent  and  good,  and  he  treats  him  as 
befits  the  especial  deity  of  tragedy. 

NOTE.  —  It  is  not  without  interest  that  the  name  Bromios 4 
does  not  occur  in  any  known  passage  of  Sophocles,  whereas  it 
is  often  found  in  the  plays  of  Euripides,  especially  in  the 
Cyclops  and  the  Bacchae,  the  two  dramas  which  most  glorify 
Dionysus. 

2.  Apollo 

In  contrast  to  Dionysus,  Apollo  fares  badly  in  the  plays  of 
Euripides,  for  he  is  one  of  the  deities  who  are  so  treated  as  to 
give  the  impression  that  the  poet  was  an  atheist  or  a  rationalist. 

1  860  f.  •  Nub.  1443  ff. 

*  229,  780  ff.  «  Bum.  24. 


84  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM    IN   EURIPIDES 

In  the  dramas  of  Aeschylus,  Apollo  is  an  exceedingly  impor- 
tant god.  He  is  primarily  the  prophet,  as  he  himself  acknowl- 
edges in  Eum.  614-621  : 


'A6r}i>aias 

8e<r/ji6v  diKcuws,  /xdiris  &v  8'  ov 
OVTT&TTOT'  elirov  fj.avTiKolffiv  kv  dpovois, 
OVK  avSpos,  ov  yvvatKds,  ov  TroXecos  Trepi, 
6  ^77  KcKtvffai  Zeus  'OXv/z7rta>»' 
TO  nev  bix.ai.ov  Tovd'  offov  ffOfVf 
/3ouXfl  7ri0au<rKco  5'   C/i/x'  ein(nre<T6ai  Tarpos. 
op/cos  yap  OVTL  Zyvos  iaxvft  ir\kov. 


Yet  the  poet  does  not  hide  faults  or  seeming  faults  in  the  god's 
history  and  character.    In  Eum.  727-728,  the  Furies  say  : 


ffv  TOL  TraXaias  8iavop.as 

6eas, 


a  charge  which  has  no  effect  upon  the  god.  Similarly  in  frag  . 
350,  Thetis  accuses  him  of  murdering  Achilles.  The  general 
impression  is  that  Apollo  is  a  god  of  light,  who  may  at  times 
seem  unjust  but  who  is  finally  justified.  The  Eumenides  shows 
the  superiority  of  his  rule  to  that  of  the  older  gods,  the  children 
of  eternal  Night.1 

As  we  should  expect,  Aeschylus  is  very  careful  in  his  choice 
of  epithets.  The  name  Loxias,  commonly  applied  to  the  god 
in  his  prophetic  character,  but  not  a  cult-title,2  is  commonly 
used  in  passages  referring  to  prophecy,  as  Ch.  900  3  and 
Eum.  19.4  In  a  few  cases,  as  Ch.  952,  there  appears  to  be 
less  reason  for  choosing  this  epithet.  Aeschylus  is  rather  fond 

1  416,  Nwcrds  aiavfjs  rkxva. 

2  Farnell,  The  Cults  of  the  Greek  States,  Vol.  IV,  p.  219,  note  a. 
s  TTOV  5i)  rd  XoiirA  Ao£ioi>  na.vTti>na.Ta.. 

4  AtAs  irpo^njs  5'  ferrt  Ao£ias  irorpoj.     Cf.  also  Sept.  618,  P.  V.  669,  Ch 
269,  558,  1030,  1036,  1039,  Eum.  61,  235,  241,  465. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  85 

of  the  vocative  of  Apollo  1  but  otherwise  he  uses  the  epithet  in 
various  relations.  Phoebus  rarely  occurs.  It  is  distinctly  con- 
nected with  the  prophetic  character  of  the  god  only  in  Eum. 
8  and  frag.  350,  11.  5-6.  We  find  it  elsewhere  in  Pers.  206, 
Sept.  691,  Eum.  283,  744.  Aeschylus  then  clearly  prefers  both 
Apollo  and  Loxias  to  Phoebus. 

To  Sophocles,  who  frequently  mentions  Apollo,  the  god  is 
the  lord  of  Delphi  and  is  often  invoked.    The  poet's 

"  aim  is  not  to  use  the  story  as  the  basis  of  a  religious  poem,  but  to 
present  the  story  itself:  he  accepts  its  morality,  and  uses  its  religious 
ideas."* 

Because  of  this  attitude,  Sophocles  gives  few  passages  that  are 
worth  quoting.  The  most  significant  is  0.  R.  708  ff.  To 
console  Oedipus,  Jocasta  says: 

xot  fj.a.6'  ofiven'  earl  voi 
ftpOTfiov  ovdlv  fiavTLKrjs  ex°v 
<j>av<t)  5e  <roc  (nj/zeta  r&vB 
XP^oyioj  7  op  iJX0e  Aatco  TTOT',  OVK  epco 
3>ol/3oi;  y'  air'  avrov,  T&V  5'   virrjpfT&v  euro, 
cos  avrov  ^01  fjjotpa.  irp6s  7rai56s  6aveiv. 

The  chorus  sings: 

yap  Aatov  TraXai^ara 
k^atpovaiv  f/drj, 
ri/xais  'AroXXcoi'  kn<f)avr)s. 
<eppei  dl  TO.  0eTa.3 

But  the  oracles  come  true.  Sophocles  holds  the  conventional 
religion.  He  is  eD/coXos.4 

Sophocles  prefers  the  epithet  Phoebus  and  uses  it  freely  in 
all   connections,   including  that   of  prophecy.5     He  employs 

1  Cf.  Sept.  159,  Ag.  1073,  1077,  1080,  1085,  1257,  Ch.  1057,  Eum.  85, 
198,  574,  610,  744. 

'  Sheppard,  Greek  Tragedy,  p.  89.         *  Aristoph.,  Ran.  82. 

»  906  ff.  •  Cf.  0.  R.  149,  305,  712,  1011. 


86  A    STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

Apollo  frequently  but  not  so  often  in  the  vocative  as  does 
Aeschylus.  Loxias  is  rare.  It  occurs  three  times  in  the  pro- 
phetic sense1  and  the  same  number  of  times  without  special 
significance.2 

In  regard  to  epithets,  Euripides  does  not  follow  strictly  the 
usage  of  Aeschylus,  because  of  his  fondness  for  Phoebus,  which 
he  uses  most  frequently  of  all  the  titles.  Yet  he  employs  Loxias 
more  freely  than  Sophocles  does.  In  28  cases,3  it  occurs  in  the 
strict  sense.  In  5  other  cases,4  the  passage  refers  to  Delphi. 
In  16,5  there  seems  little  reason  for  the  selection.  Apollo  does 
not  occur  in  the  vocative  as  freely  as  in  the  plays  of  Aeschylus. 
Euripides  agrees  with  Aeschylus  in  using  this  epithet  frequently 
in  scenes  in  which  Cassandra  has  a  part.  So  in  Ag.  1072-1330, 
Apollo  occurs  11  times  and  Loxias  3.  Perhaps  this  choice  is 
due  to  the  supposed  derivation  of  'A-n-oXXuv  from  droXXu/u.6 
So  in  Tro.  308-461,  Apollo  occurs  three  times,  Loxias  and 
Phoebus  each  once.  Loxias  7  is  probably  chosen  because  of 
the  special  emphasis  laid  on  the  prophetic  honor  of  the  god. 

Despite  this  verbal  archaism,  Euripides  conceives  of  Apollo 
in  a  way  very  different  from  that  of  his  predecessors.  To  him 
Phoebus  is  neither  a  benign  nor  a  conventional  deity.  He  is 
everything  that  a  man,  much  less  a  god,  should  not  be.  Let  us 
now  look  at  some  of  the  poet's  judgments  about  him. 

1  O.  R.  853,  994,  El.  82. 

•  0.  R.  1103,  Ichneutae,  367,  436. 

»  Her.  1028,  Supp.  7,  Ion  67,  72,  243,  531,  728,  774,  781,  974,  1347, 
Tro.  356,  El.  399,  1266,  I.  T.  943,  1013,  1084,  1280,  1438,  Phoen.  284,  409, 
1703,  Or.  165,  285,  1666,  1681,  Bacch.  1336,  Melanippe,  14  (Frag.  Trag. 
Pap.). 

•  And.  51,  1065,  Ion  187,  1455,  Phoen.  215. 

•  Ion  36,  78,  311,  425,  931,  1218,  1287,  1531,  1540,  1548,  1608,  Tro. 
1174,  Or.  268,  419,  Rh.  979,  frag.  455  (Cresphontes)  . 

8  Cf.  1080-1082. 


y&p  oil  ju6Xt$  TO  dtbrepov. 

7  356. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  87 

In  Ale.  28  ff.,  Thanatos  attacks  him  for  saving  Admetus  and 
deceiving  the  Fates  as  the  Erinyes  do  in  the  Eumenides.  When 
the  god  tries  to  save  Alcestis  by  saying  that  Thanatos  would 
receive  rich  gifts  if  the  queen  should  die  in  old  age,  he  receives 
the  answer: 

7rp6s  T&V  k\6vT(j}v,  f>oT/3e,  rov  vofiov  Tidrjs.1 


Probably,  however,  Euripides  did  not  intend  this  scene  to  be 
taken  seriously. 

The  Andromache  contains  the  next  case  of  hostility.  Neop- 
tolemus  went  to  Delphi  to  ask  Phoebus  to  atone  for  the 
death  of  Achilles.  While  on  a  second  trip  to  obtain  pardon 
for  the  sin  which  he  has  thus  committed,2  he  is  slain  by  the 
machinations  of  Orestes.  Old  Peleus,  in  accusing  the  god  of 
murder,  says: 

OlTTAttJ'    T£KVO)V 

fj,'  ecrrtpriff'  6  $oT/3os.3 

Thetis  orders  the  burial  of  Neoptolemus  at  Delphi  as  AeX</>oij 
ovetdos.4 

The  poet  soon  advances  beyond  this  stage.  In  the  Ion,  a 
thinly  veiled  attack  on  the  god,  everything  ends  happily,  but 
the  play  shows  the  shortsightedness  of  the  god.  He  practically 
sends  word  by  Athena  that  he  does  not  dare  to  meet  his  former 
bride: 

fTTOlVV/jLOS    0€    ffr]5    CKplKO/ZT/J'    x"ov°S 

IlaXXds,  bpbjMa  <nrfvcra.<r'  'ATroXXwj'os  irapa, 
os  «  nlv  6\f/tv  <r$a)j'  /zoXei;>  OVK  ril-lov, 
H^l  ruv  Trapoide  /xe/z^t?  «  ukaov  n6\y, 

81  ire/jLTTCi  TOVS  \6yovs   v/j,lv  0pdcrai.B 


She  then  says  that  Apollo  intended  to  reveal  Ion's  parentage 
at  Athens.  There  is  no  excuse  made  for  the  god's  cruelty  in 
abandoning  Creusa.  True  are  the  words  of  Ion  : 

1  57.  »  1212-1213.  •  1555  ff. 

»  49-55.  *  1241. 


88  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 


tl  8'  —  ov  yap  eorcu,  rep  X67(jj  5e 

SIKCIS  ffiaiajv  Saxrer'  avdp&irois  ya.fj.wv, 

ov  Kol  Hoaeldwv  Zeus  0'  5s  ovpavov  Kparel, 

vaous  Tivovres  dSi/das  Kei'wo'eTe. 

rds  iJSoi'ds  yap  TTJS  irpon^Bias  rapes 

d5i/cctr'.  OVKCT'  avdpuirovs  KO/COJS 
diKatov,  ti  ra  T&V  Qe&v  KO\O. 
'  ,  dXXd  TOUS  didaffKOvras  radt.1 


In  the  Electro,,  Euripides  continues  the  attack.    The  matricides 
condemn  Apollo  : 


Or.    S)  cfroTjSc,  TToXXiJi'  7'  anadLav  Wecriricras  — 

El.      07TOU    5'   'ATTOXXCOV    (TKttlOS    ^,    TIVK    GO^ol',  2 


The  Dioscuri  blame  him: 


5£/ccua  /i^  rw  r/5'  ex«,  <ru  5' 

re,  $ot]8os  —  dXX'  a^a^  yap  €(rr'  e/xos, 
)'  erodes  5'  cov  ou/c  exp'jo'c  o"ot  <ro<t>a.s 


They  did  not  save  Clytaemestra  because 


T    avayKris     7        TO 

r 


In  the  Iphigenia  in  Tauris,  Orestes  several  times  reproaches 
Apollo,  as  in  711: 

5'   6  $oT^3os  navris  &v 


However,  the  oracles  are  fulfilled  and  so  it  is  shown  that  Apollo 
is  not  the  rogue  that  he  at  first  seemed  to  be.  Then,  too,  the 
ode  1234-1283  does  not  put  Apollo's  acquisition  of  Delphi 
in  a  very  creditable  light. 

The  Orestes  contains  more  attacks  on  the  god's  honesty  and 
veracity.    Among  such  instances  are: 

1  444  ff.  3  1244-1246. 

2  971-972.  *  1301-1302. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  89 

u  6'   adudav  / 
and  Ao^la  de 

OOTIS  n'  cTrapas  epyov 

TOLS  fjifv  \6yot.s  tjv(f>pave,  TOIS  5'  fpyoL<nv  o#.2 


Here  again  the  oracles  are  fulfilled  and  so  Orestes  says: 

5)  Ao£ia  /xavreic,  (rail'  86airiffiJ.a.T(i)v, 
ov  if/evdo/jLavTis  fjffd'  ap',  eiXX' 


These  are  among  the  most  significant  comments  on  Apollo. 
We  notice  at  once  how  they  differ  in  tone  from  those  which  relate 
to  Dionysus.  There  was  respect;  here,  contempt;  there,  wor- 
ship; here,  revolt.  What  did  Euripides  think  of  Apollo? 

Evidently  he  did  not  admire  the  god  of  the  silver  bow.  He 
never  loses  a  chance  to  attack  him,  and  we  have  seen  how  he 
clearly  removes  dreams  from  the  sphere  of  Apollo's  influence 
and  restores  them  to  Xdwv.4  He  so  consistently  represents 
Phoebus  as  foolish,  unwise,  even  criminal,  that  he  seems  to 
bear  the  god  special  hatred. 

Are  we  to  agree  with  Prof.  Verrall  5  that  Euripides  never 
believed  in  him  as  a  real  being?  It  seems  unnecessary  to  hold 
that  the  poet  intended  the  intelligent  hearer  to  disregard  pro- 
logue and  epilogue  and  then  to  rearrange  the  story  of  the  inter- 
vening part.  If  we  deny  the  personal  reality  of  Apollo,  our 
interpretation  of  the  plays  is  often  forced. 

How  are  we  to  regard  Delphi?  As  a  gigantic  fraud  arranged 
to  deceive  well-meaning  people?  Yet  on  the  whole  it  is  clear 
that  the  god,  himself,  is  responsible.  A  Jocasta  may  throw 
blame  on  the  servants  of  Apollo.  Euripides,  as  an  honest  en- 
emy, realizes  that  his  real  enemy  is  the  god,  not  the  prophet. 
The  unimportance  of  the  priests  is  surprising.  We  hear  a  great 
deal  about  oracles,  but  we  can  hardly  regard  them  as  the  work 

*  28.  «  Chap.  VIII. 

1  285-287.  *  Euripides  the  Rationalist,  p.  146. 

1  1666-1667 


90  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

of  the  priests  as  distinct  from  the  god.  This  attack  on  Apollo 
as  the  responsible  person  is  to  be  contrasted  with  the  poet's 
attitude  in  the  Iphigenia  in  Aulide,  one  of  his  latest  plays. 
There  we  hear  very  little  of  Apollo  but  much  of  Calchas.  So 
the  old  man,  in  response  to  Clytaemestra's  question  as  to  the 
reason  for  the  sacrifice  of  Iphigenia,  says: 

Qk(r4>a.d' ,  cos  76  ^ijeri   KdXxas,  Ivo.  Tropeuiyrai  crrparos.1 

Throughout,  one  wonders  how  much  responsibility  is  to  be  laid 
upon  Calchas  and  how  much  upon  the  deity.  Euripides, 
adopting  an  attitude  toward  Apollo  unusual  for  him,  has 
tried  to  suggest  that  Calchas  is  responsible  for  the  crime.2 
Except  in  this  play,  the  god  is  throughout  the  cause  of  religious 
wrong. 

If  it  is  incorrect  to  regard  Apollo  as  simply  non-existent  and 
to  interpret  the  plays  as  attacks  on  Delphi,  what  shall  we  say? 
It  is  true  that  in  many  cases  we  have  an  apparent  orthodoxy 
at  the  end.  Yet  the  Ion  seems  to  be  the  work  of  an  unbeliever, 
and  must  be  regarded  as  an  attack  on  the  god.  No  one  who 
thought  at  all,  could  find  anything  but  condemnation  for  a 
being  who  would  abandon  his  child  and  its  mother  so  cheerfully. 
Similarly  in  the  Electra,  every  one  would  agree  with  the  state- 
ment of  the  Dioscuri  about  the  folly  of  the  god.  But  who  would 
consult  a  god,  if  one  knew  that  he  might  give  the  most  unsuit- 
able advice? 

Euripides' 

"tendency  was  to  treat  the  story  as  a  piece  of  ordinary  life,  though 
he  was  checked  at  every  turn  by  convention.  The  result  is  inevit- 
ably that  the  legend,  thus  presented,  is  exposed.  Euripides  was 
aware  of  that,  and  was  sometimes  quite  deliberately  exposing  latent 
immorality.  Sometimes  he  meant  his  audience  to  feel  uneasy,  to 
think  that  if  the  story  were  true  it  was  highly  discreditable:  some- 
times he  meant  them  to  infer  that  it  was  not  true."3 

1  879.  2  Cf.  Masqueray,  Euripide  et  ses  idees,  p.  152. 

3  Sheppard,  Greek  Tragedy,  p.  137  f . 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  91 

That  is  what  is  involved  in  the  rebukes  of  Apollo.    Euripides 
does  not  deny  the  god's  existence;  he  merely  exposes  the  myth. 

In  this,  the  poet  could  not  be  prosecuted  for  impiety.  Apollo 
always  rises  to  the  occasion  and  does  what  he  should.  His 
oracles  come  true.  At  most,  the  spectators  might  suspect; 
they  could  prove  nothing  about  the  personal  faith  of  the  poet. 

It  is  interesting,  however,  to  find  that  Apollo  aroused 
Euripides'  ire.  The  god,  whom  Aeschylus  treated  as  a  beneficent 
deity,  is  changed.  Perhaps  his  worship  was  too  well-defined, 
too  open  for  the  later  poet.  In  Eum.  416,  the  Erinyes  opposed 
to  Apollo  are  the  NUKTOS  alavw  Tewa.  In  the  Bacchae,  however, 
Dionysus  says  : 


TO.  TroXXcr  (re/xvoTT/r'  exet  (r/coros,1 
and  KO.V  ri/J-epq.  TO  7'  aio~xP°v  e£ei>poi  TW  av.2 


Both  Dionysus  and  Apollo  were  worshipped  at  Delphi,  but 
the  two  became  friends  probably  only  after  a  long  contest,  for 
they  were  of  different  origins.3  Euripides  did  not  try  to  respect 
both.  He  followed  Dionysus  the  mystic. 

It  is  clear  that  the  poet  did  not  trust  Apollo.  Perhaps  since 
the  priests  at  Delphi  favored  the  Spartans,1  Euripides  was  too 
patriotic  to  honor  a  god  who  was  partial  to  his  country's  ene- 
mies. Since  he  was  writing  for  a  religious  festival,  he  could  not 
deny  the  god's  existence,  even  if  he  did  not  believe.  Conse- 
quently he  depicts  him  in  such  a  way  that  the  most  unintellec- 
tual  of  the  audience  would  feel  such  a  god  unfit  for  honor, 
much  less  for  worship,  —  a  method  of  attack  far  more  effective 
and  insidious  than  an  open  denial  would  have  been.  Whatever 
the  poet's  belief,  he  assumes  the  existence  of  Apollo  in  his  plays, 
for  he  aimed  to  present  the  god  as  a  contemptible  character 
and  to  allow  the  audience  to  draw  its  own  conclusions.  Di- 
onysus he  praises,  Apollo  he  condemns.  In  so  doing,  Euripides 

1  486.  *  Cf.  Rohde,  Psyche',  II,  p.  52. 

1  488.  4  Wilamowitz,  Apollo,  p.  39. 


92  A   STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

practically  revives  the  old  idea  of  a  struggle  between  the  gods, 
and  moves  tragedy  back  toward  its  original  position  by  dis- 
crediting Zeus  and  Apollo,  and  elevating  Dionysus,  the  original 
patron  of  tragedy. 

3.  Athena 

As  the  especial  deity  of  Athens,  the  virgin  goddess  Pallas 
Athena  occupies  a  somewhat  unusual  position  in  Greek  tragedy. 
Because  of  her  relationship  to  the  state,  it  was  probably  expe- 
dient that  she  be  treated  with  particular  respect.  Indeed  she 
stands  as  a  representative  of  certain  tendencies  which  Athens 
idealized,  and  even,  in  a  way,  of  the  city  itself,  as  in  Supp. 
711-712,  where  Euripides  has  Theseus  quoted  as  saying: 

&  7rcu6es,  fi  /IT)  (rxwere  artppbv  56pv 
onrapT&v  rod'  avbp&v,  oi'xeTCU  ra  IlaXXciSos. 

In  the  Eumenides  of  Aeschylus,  Athena  plays  an  important 
part.  It  is  her  action  in  conjunction  with  the  Court  of  the 
Areopagus,  which  she  establishes,  that  frees  Orestes  from  the 
pursuit  of  the  Erinyes  and  so  vindicates  Apollo.  This  means 
the  god  of  the  silver  bow  has  chosen  to  give  human  and  divine 
sanction  to  his  oracle.  He  says  to  the  Erinyes: 

dinas  8e  IlaXXas  T&vb'  eiroirTfVffei  fled.1 

By  her  act  the  goddess  renders  Argos  friendly  to  Athens.2  The 
goddess  is  also  mentioned  in  Pers.  347,  where  Athens  is  called 
TTO\LV  .  .  .  HaXXdSos,  and  Sept.  130,  where  the  terrified  Theban 
maidens  appeal  to  the  goddess.  In  the  extant  plays,  her  usual 
title  is  IlaXXds.  The  name  'A6ava  is  found  three  times  and 
always  in  the  vocative.3  The  longer  form  'Adyvala  occurs 
three  times.4 

Athena  appears  once  in  the  extant  plays  of  Sophocles,  in  the 
Ajax.  Here  her  role  is  quite  different.  She  is  the  stern  and 
jealous  goddess,  the  punisher  of  Ajax.  Tecmessa  says  of  her: 

1  224.  3  Eum.  235,  443,  892. 

2  754  ff .  «  Eum.  288,  299,  614. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  93 


TOiovde  nevTOi  Zrjvos  17  deivr]  0eos 
IlaXXas 


Sophocles  prefers  the  name  Athena,  which  occurs  ten  times.2 
Pallas  occurs  five  times  3  and  Pallas  Athena  *  once.  Only  in 
0.  C.  107: 

IT',  &  fjLeylaTijs  IlaXXdSos  KaXoi'/zevai 

ira<ru>v  'Adfjvai  Ti/xtwraTTj  TroXis, 

is  this  epithet  used  in  connection  with  Athens.  It  is  mentioned 
three  times  in  reference  to  Thebes.  In  Phil.  134,  the  goddess 
is  again  joined  with  Odysseus  as  'Adava  IloXids.  Other  epithets 
occur  in  0.  C.  706,  1071. 

Athena  appears  in  the  drama  of  Euripides  more  frequently 
than  any  other  deity.  In  three,  Supplices,  Ion,  Iphigenia  in 
Tauris,  she  comes  as  a  deus  ex  machina  at  the  end  of  the  play. 
Her  appearance  then  is  in  a  way  parallel  to  that  in  the  Eu- 
menides.  In  the  Iphigenia  in  Tauris,  she  prevents  Thoas  from 
pursuing  Orestes  and  so  again  causes  the  fulfilment  of  the  oracle 
of  Apollo.  In  966,  we  have  an  allusion  to  her  intervention 
at  the  trial  in  Athens.  In  the  Ion,  she  comes  again  to  clear  away 
the  difficulties  which  the  oracle  of  Apollo  has  caused  and  which 
the  god  is  himself  unable  or  unwilling  to  remove.  Both  of  these 
interventions  bring  help  and  power  to  Athens,  the  former 
giving  it  possession  of  the  statue  of  Artemis,  the  latter  restoring 
to  it  the  heir  of  Erechtheus  and  the  ancestor  of  the  lonians. 
In  the  third  case,  the  Supplices,  she  is  introduced  not  to  help 
Apollo  but  merely  to  strengthen  Athens.  She  gives  directions 
to  Theseus  concerning  the  agreement  which  he  is  to  make  with 
Adrastus  so  that  Athens  and  Argos  may  be  friendly.  Inciden- 
tally she  orders  Theseus  to  have  the  oath  preserved  at  Delphi 
under  the  guardianship  of  Apollo. 

1  952-963. 

1  Aj.  14,  74,  91,  112,  757,  771,  0.  R.  159,  Phil.  134,  0.  C.  706,  1071. 

1  Ant.  1184,  Aj,  953,  Tr,  1031,  0.  R.  20,  0.  C.  107. 

«  0.  C.  1090. 


94  A   STUDY   OF   ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

In  the  above  cases,  the  r61e  of  Athena  is  similar  to  that  which 
she  had  in  the  Eumenides.  In  the  two  other  plays  in  which  she 
appears,  she  plays  a  part  somewhat  analogous  to  that  which 
she  had  in  the  Ajax.  So  in  the  Troades,  she  is  the  angry  goddess 
slighted  by  the  outrage  of  Ajax  against  Cassandra,  and  she 
plans  to  punish  the  Greeks  who  have  failed  to  protest, 

O>S    O.V    TO    \OLTTOV    70.\i      CLVCLKTOp'    6VCT€^etv 

el8S}ff'  'Axaiot,  deovs  re  rovs  aXXous  akfieiv.1 

To  be  sure  this  might  be  construed  as  pettiness  on  the  part  of 
the  divinity,  and  there  is  some  irony  in  the  treatment  of  the 
goddess  whose  favorites  have  insulted  her,  but  on  the  whole 
she  is  presented  with  perhaps  more  reverence  than  in  the  Ajax, 
where  she  summons  the  unhappy  man  to  show  him  in  his 
degradation  to  Odysseus. 

In  the  Rhesus,  Athena  as  the  friend  of  Odysseus  directs  him 
to  the  camp  of  Rhesus  and  deceives  Paris  who  is  coming  to 
Hector  to  tell  him  about  the  intruders.  2  This  illustrates  Phil. 
134  or  Rh.  609-610,  where  Odysseus  says  to  the  goddess: 


ev  TTovoiffi  yap 
irapovv'  CL/JLVVCLS  rots  ejuoTs  act  Tore. 

In  938  ff.,  the  Muse  rebukes  her  for  the  death  of  Rhesus,  but 
this  is  more  of  an  attack  on  war  than  on  the  goddess  herself. 
In  fact  both  the  Troades  and  the  Rhesus  show  the  horrible  and 
inhuman  character  of  war. 

In  some  passages,  the  goddess  is  connected  with  the  fortunes 
of  Heracles  and  his  family.  So  in  Tr.  1031  ,  the  suffering  Heracles 
invokes  her.  In  H.  F.,  she  saves  Amphitryon  and  stops  the  mad 
career  of  Heracles  by  stunning  him  until  the  fit  of  madness  has 
passed  away.3 

Athens  is  particularly  the  favorite  of  the  goddess.  Besides 
numerous  allusions  to  the  city  as  the  possession  of  the  goddess,4 

*  85-86.  3  Cf.  907,  1003  f  . 

2  595  ff.  4  /.  T.  1014,  etc. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   EURIPIDES  95 

there  are  passages  where  this  usage  is  extended,  as  in  Supp. 
711-712.  So  she  is  regarded  as  the  divine  helper  of  the  Athenian 
army  in  Her.  349-350, 

T&V  pev  yap  "Hpa  Trpoo-raret,  Aios  da.jj.ap, 
•finwv  8'  'Adrjva, 
and  352,        viK^nkv-r]  yap  IloXXas  OVK  a 


Euripides  mentions  the  goddess  in  connection  with  various 
other  stories,  as  that  of  the  contest  of  the  three  goddesses  before 
Paris,1  and  with  her  temple  in  Thebes.2 

As  regards  the  choice  of  epithet,  Euripides  follows  the  usage 
of  Aeschylus  and  prefers  the  title  Pallas.  There  seems  to  be 
in  many  passages  little  reason  for  the  choice,  save  that  the  latter 
title  is  the  more  common  where  the  goddess  is  connected  with 
Athens. 

Athena,  as  we  might  expect,  is  handled  kindly  by  Euripides. 
Aeschylus  shows  her  in  the  Eumenides  as  confirming  the  oracles 
of  Apollo,  and  Euripides  does  the  same  in  several  plays.  Even 
where  this  is  not  her  purpose,  she  usually  intervenes  in  the  in- 
terest of  some  one,  whether  it  be  Athens,  Odysseus,  or  Heracles. 
It  is  only  in  the  Troades  that  we  see  her  angered  and  destructive, 
more  as  in  the  Ajax. 

Euripides  treats  Athena  as  a  beneficent  goddess  and  in  rdles 
similar  to  that  in  Aeschylus'  works,  although  she  appears  in 
others,  owing  to  the  greater  number  of  stories  treated  in  the 
extant  plays.  Yet  these  appearances  do  not  bear  so  purely  a 
religious  character  as  do  the  references  to  Dionysus.  Athena 
is  a  goddess,  and  as  the  patroness  of  Athens,  she  is  treated  with 
respect.  Still  throughout  she  bears  a  little  too  much  of  the 
character  of  the  deus  ex  machina  for  us  to  judge  how  truly 
Euripides  believed  in  her,  although  he  represented  her  in  the 
orthodox  way. 

1  Tro.  925,  971  «.,  I.  A.  183,  1300  ff.  »  Phoen.  1062,  1372. 


LIST  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  WORKS  CITED 

EDITIONS 

Aeschyli  Tragoediae.    A.  Sidgwick.    Oxford  Text. 

Sophocles.     The  Text  of  the  Seven  Plays.    R.  C.  Jebb.    Cambridge,  1897. 

Euripides  Fabulae.     G.  Murray.     Oxford  Text. 

Tragicorum  Graecorum  Fragmenta.     A.  Nauck.2    Leipzig,  1889. 

Fragmenta  Tragica  Papyracea.     A.  S.  Hunt.    Oxford  Text. 

Aristophanis  Comoediae.    F.  W.  Hall  and  W.  M.  Geldart.    Oxford  Text. 

The  Supplices  of  Aeschylus.    T.  G.  Tucker.     London,  1889. 

The  Agamemnon  of  Aeschylus.    A.  W.  Verrall.     London,  1904. 

Aeschylus'  Eumenides.    A.  Sidgwick.3    Oxford,  1902. 

Aeschylos'  Orestie.     N.  Wecklein.     Leipzig,  1888. 

Aeschylus'  Septem  contra  Thebas.    A.  Sidgwick.     Oxford,  1903. 

Prometheus  Bound  of  Aeschylus.     N.  Wecklein  and  F.  D.  Allen. 

Boston,  1891. 

Sophocles'  Ajax.     R.  C.  Jebb.     Cambridge,  1907. 
Sophocles'  Philoctetes.     R.  C.  Jebb.     Cambridge,  1890. 
Sept  Tragedies  d'  Euripide.    H.  Weil*.     Paris,  1905. 
Euripides'  Hecuba.    C.  B.  Heberden.     Oxford,  1901. 
Aristotle  on  the  Art  of  Poetry.     I.  Bywater.     Oxford,  1909. 

OTHER  WORKS 

CROISET,  M.  De  la  t6tralogie  dans  la  trage'die  grecque.  Revue  des 
e'tudes  grecques,  Vol.  I. 

DECHARME,  P.    Euripide  et  1'esprit  de  son  theatre.     Paris,  1893. 

DETSCHEFF,  D.  De  tragoediarum  Graecarum  conformatione  scaenica 
ac  dramatica.  Gottingen,  1904. 

DYER,  L.    The  Plot  of  the  Agamemnon.    Harvard  Studies,  Vol.  VII. 

FAHNELL,  L.  R.    The  Cults  of  the  Greek  States.     Oxford,  1896-1909. 

FREERICKS,  H.     De  Aeschyli  Supplicum  choro.     Duderstadt,  1883. 

FRIES,  H.  De  conexu  chori  personae  cum  fabulae  actione.  Got- 
tingen, 1913. 

GIRARD,  P.  La  trilogie  chez  Euripide.  Revue  des  eludes  grecques, 
Vol.  XVII. 

HENNING,  E.    De  tragicorum  Atticorum  narrationibus.    Gottingen,  1910. 

KANZ,  J.     De  tetrametro  trochaico.     Darmstadt,  1913. 

KRAUSSE,  O.     De  Euripide  Aeschyli  instauratore.    Jena,  1905. 


98  A    STUDY   OF  ARCHAISM   IN   EURIPIDES 

MACURDT,  G.  H.    The  Chronology  of  the  Extant  Plays  of  Euripides. 

Lancaster,  1905. 

MASQUERAY,  P.    Euripide  et  ses  ide'es.     Paris,  1908. 
MURRAY,  G.    History  of  Ancient  Greek  Literature.     London,  1908. 

Ritual  Forms  in  Greek  Tragedy.    (J.  E.  Harrison,  Themis.)     Cam- 
bridge, 1912. 

Euripides  and  His  Age.     London,  1913. 

PETERSEN,  E.   Euripides'  Hypsipyle.    Rheinisches  Museum,  Vol.  LXVIII. 
PLATT,  A.    The  Burial  of  Ajax.     Classical  Review,  Vol.  XXV. 
POST,  C.  R.    The  Dramatic  Art  of  Aeschylus.    Harvard  Studies,  Vol.  XVI. 
ROHDE,  E.     Psyche.6    Tubingen,  1910. 
ROSCHER,  W.  H.    Ausfiihrliches  Lexikon  der  griechischen  und  romischen 

Mythologie.     Leipzig,  1884-1915. 
SCOTT,  W.     The  "Mountain-Mother"  Ode  in  the  Helena  of  Euripides. 

Classical  Quarterly,  Vol.  III. 

SHEPPARD,  J.  T.    The  First  Scene  of  the  Suppliants  of  Aeschylus.     Clas- 
sical Quarterly,  Vol.  V. 
Greek  Tragedy.    Cambridge,  1911. 

SMYTH,  H.  W.    The  Anapaests  of  Aischylos.    Harvard  Studies,  Vol.  VII. 
VERRALL,  A.  W.    Euripides  the  Rationalist.     Cambridge,  1895. 
Essays  on  Four  Plays  of  Euripides.    Cambridge,  1905. 
The  Bacchants  of  Euripides.     Cambridge,  1909. 

WELCKER,    F.    G.      Die    Aeschylische    Trilogie    Prometheus.      Darm- 
stadt, 1824. 

WiLAMOWiTz-MoELLENDORFP,  U.  VON.    Analecta  Euripidea.   Berlin,  1876. 
Die  Perser  des  Aischylos.     Hermes,  Vol.  XXXII. 
Drei  Schlufiscenen.    Sitzungsbericht  d.  kgl.  PreuC.  Akad.  zu  Berlin, 

Phil.-Hist.  Klasse,  1903. 
Apollo.    Oxford,  1908. 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

Columbia  University  in  the  City  of  New  York 


The  Press  was  incorporated  June  8,  1893,  to  promote  the  publi- 
cation of  the  results  of  original  research.  It  is  a  private  corporation, 
related  directly  to  Columbia  University  by  the  provisions  that  its 
Trustees  shall  be  officers  of  the  University  and  that  the  President  of 
Columbia  University  shall  be  President  of  the  Press. 


The  publications  of  the   Columbia  University  Press  include 
works  on  Biography,  History,  Economics,  Education,  Philosophy, 
Linguistics,  and  Literature,  and  the  following  series: 
Columbia  University  Contributions  to  Anthropology. 
Columbia  University  Biological  Series. 
Columbia  University  Studies  in  Cancer  and  Allied  Subjects. 
Columbia  University  Studies  in  Classical  Philology. 
Columbia  University  Studies  in  Comparative  Literature. 
Columbia  University  Studies  in  English. 
Columbia  University  Geological  Series. 
Columbia  University  Germanic  Studies. 
Columbia  University  Lido-Iranian  Series. 
Columbia  University  Contributions  to  Oriental  History  and 

Philology. 

Columbia  University  Oriental  Studies. 

Columbia  University  Studies  in  Romance  Philology  and  Liter- 
ature. 
Records  of  Civilization:    Sources  and  Studies. 

Adams  Lectures.  Carpentier  Lectures. 

Julius  Beer  Lectures.  Hewitt  Lectures. 

Blumenthal  Lectures.  Jesup  Lectures. 

Catalogues  will  be  sent  free  on  application. 


LEMCKE  &  BUECHNER,  Agents 

30-32  West  27th  ST.,  NEW  YORK 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES  IN 

CLASSICAL  PHILOLOGY 
Edited  by  the  Department  of  Classical  Philology 

THE  SATIRE  OF  SENECA  ON  THE  APOTHEOSIS  OF 
CLAUDIUS,  COMMONLY  CALLED  THE  AHOKOAO- 
KTNTfi2I2.  A  Study.  By  ALLAN  PERLEY  BALL, 
Ph.D.  12mo,  cloth,  pp.  vii  +  256.  Price,  $1.25  net. 

STRESS  ACCENT  IN  LATIN  POETRY.  By  ELIZABETH 
HICKMAN  DU  Bois,  Ph.D.  12mo,  cloth,  pp.  v  +  96. 
Price,  $1.25  net. 

STUDIES  IN  THE  PHILOSOPHICAL  TERMINOLOGY 
OF  LUCRETIUS  AND  CICERO.  By  KATHARINE  C. 
REILEY,  Ph.D.  12mo,  cloth,  pp.  ix  +  133.  Price,  $1.25 
net. 

COSTUME  IN  ROMAN  COMEDY.  By  CATHARINE 
SAUNDERS,  Ph.D.  12mo,  cloth,  pp.  x  + 145.  Price,  $1.25 
net 

DE  INFINITIVI  FINALIS  VEL  CONSECUTIVI  CON- 
STRUCTIONS APUD  PRISCOS  POETAS  GRAB- 
COS.  By  CHARLES  JONES  OGDEN,  Ph.D.  8vo,  cloth, 
pp.  65.  Price,  $1.00  net. 

THE  BELLUM  CIVILE  OF  PETRONIUS.  By  FLORENCE 
T.  BALDWIN,  Ph.D.  12mo,  cloth,  pp.  viii  + 264.  Price, 
$1.25  net. 

RELIGIOUS  CULTS  ASSOCIATED  WITH  THE  AMA- 
ZONS. By  FLORENCE  MARY  BENNETT,  Ph.D.  8vo, 
pp.  ix  +  79.  Price,  cloth,  $1.25  net,  paper  $1.00  net. 

A  STUDY  OF  ARCHAISM  IN  EURIPIDES.  By  CLAR- 
ENCE AUGUSTUS  MANNING,  Ph.D.  8vo,  cloth,  pp.  xi  + 
98.  Price,  $1.25  net. 

STUDIES  FROM  MAGIC  IN  LATIN  LITERATURE. 
By  EUGENE  TAVENNER,  Ph.D.  8vo,  cloth.  In  press. 

LEMCKE  &  BUECHNER,  Agents 
30-32  West  27th  Street  NEW  YORK 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A     000  696  038     9 


